Re: [boost] Name and Namespace for Potential Boost Extended Floating-Point

Subject: Re: [boost] Name and Namespace for Potential Boost Extended Floating-Point
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-01 01:25:39

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Simonson, Lucanus J <
lucanus.j.simonson_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Christopher Kormanyos
> > <e_float_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> >
> >> From: Matthias Schabel <boost_at_[hidden]>
> >> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 12:00 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [boost] Name and Namespace for Potential Boost Extended
> >> Floating-Point
> >>
> >>>> mp_float
> >>>> mp_int
> >>>> mp_rational
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>
> >> If this is going to be in the "multiprecision" namespace, isn't
> >> "mp_*" redundant? Why not just
> >>
> >> multiprecision::float
> >> multiprecision::int
> >> multiprecision::rational
> >>
> >> $0.02
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> No, unfortunately not. Please remember when using a namespace, a name
> >> like "float" can not be distinguished from the POD type float.
> >> Remember that many developers *use* a namespace to avoid typing.
> >>
> >> The ugly prefix is needed to guarantee unique naming.
> >>
> >
> > Couldn't you just do what "every" other boost library does, and
> > append an underscore?
>
> In the interest of clarity I would prefer to see mp_float and not float_ in
> user code that *use* the namespace.
>

Noted.  I actually misread the original comment and inferred an objection to
float and int already being C++ keywords.

In any case, it is indeed a stylistic preference.  If I was really worried
about verbosity, I would probably alias boost::multiprecision (or whatever
the namespace was) to bmp and then use bmp::float_.  Or maybe better is
real.  Yes, these objects can't cover *all* real numbers, but their purpose
is to provide (nearly) arbitrarily precise approximations to real numbers,
right?  A similar "fudging", if you will, of "real" is used by Boost.Spirit
(qi::real_parser and karma::real_generator).

float_ in no way intuitively means multiprecision floating point data type.
>

Agreed, but I think the "no way" is a bit excessive.  The only thing it
doesn't really convey is the multiprecision aspect, and that context is
given by the enclosing namespace.  I see multiprecision::mp_float as having
unnecessary lexical redundancy...or something like that :/

Intuitively, I would expect float_ in a boost library would mean a type that
> wraps a literal floating point value in a type for metaprogramming and might
> be declared something like:
>
> template <float f>
> float_ : float_c<f>;
>

I'm guessing your expectations are based on Boost.MPL, but keep in mind that
there are actually float_ and int_ objects in Boost.Spirit.Qi and
Boost.Spirit.Karma which have little to do with wrapping numeric values.
So, again, it's difficult to infer much from an identifier without
appropriate context.

- Jeff