Re: [boost] [xint] quick review

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] quick review
From: Domagoj Saric (domagoj.saric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-25 05:30:33

"Chad Nelson" <chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:20110315112008.04d53571_at_ubuntu...

>> However, since are provided, I'd like them to be handled as well as
>> possible. Chad has already said that he expects support for them to
>> improve and that's good enough for me, since it won't require
>> breaking the interface.
>>
>> Maybe I've missed it but I haven't seen concrete ideas as to how
>> exactly Chad plans to do it [...]
>
><http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/215984>

True, I did miss that one...however AFAICT this is a proposal by Jeffrey Lee 
Hellrung and it does not quite match what SW was saying ("...since it won't 
require breaking the interface") as it is a proposal for expanding the 
interface to accept user defined xint types and, additionally, to which you 
conclude with "Yes, there's plenty to do before I even seriously think about 
that."
It is also not entirely clear that it would provide 'true fixed-size 
integer' support (i.e. with near zero overhead) nor that you/XInt would 
provide a fixed-sized xint type (although, given all the fuss about all of 
this, I would be content with just the option to be able to provide a 
fixed-size xint type myself if the library in the end provides no other way 
of new-virtual-throw-free way of using it).
"As said so many times before", it would be a much easier first hand 
solution to simply separate the algorithms into separate, private, 
preferably non-template functions. This would benefit even the 
public-algorithms and concept-modeling-xint-types (to which SW objected) 
type of design as it would reduce template bloat...

-- 
"What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual
devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than
from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate."
Neil Postman