Re: [boost] [xint] quick review

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] quick review
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-25 15:30:15

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:56 AM, Daniel James <dnljms_at_[hidden]> wrote:
[...]

> Personally, I'd just supply two different classes and overload the
> appropriate functions rather than implementing a complicated generic
> version. It'd probably take less effort and be more pleasant to use
> (faster compiles and shorter template error messages). Having the two
> implementations to compare would also be an aid for more ambitious
> people.
>
> If Chad doesn't wish to implement an efficient fixed size integer, and
> his existing one is consider unacceptable then it could be removed
> from xint, and left for someone else to implement. They don't need to
> share code to be interchangeable and if it's as important as you say,
> I'm sure someone will be willing to put the effort in.
>
> IMO requirements for a fast fixed size integer shouldn't deny those
> who want a dynamically sized integer.
>

+1 to all 3 of above.

- Jeff