Re: [boost] Review request: extended complex number library

Subject: Re: [boost] Review request: extended complex number library
From: Matthieu Schaller (matthieu.schaller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-12 17:50:31

>> 26.4.0.3> If the result of a function is not mathematically defined or
>> not in the range of representable values for its type, the behavior is
>> undefined.
>
> This is not one of those cases, since the result is indeed 
> mathematically defined and is representable as a perfectly normal value.
>
>> De-normalized numbers are apparently not supported.
>
> I don't see how denormalized numbers are related to this.
>
>
I do totally agree with you. I am not arguing against you. I am just 
providing the extracts of the norm more or less (rather less in this 
case) related to the question of precision that has been risen earlier 
in the discussion.

The original question still remains. Should a boost::complex class rely 
on the std::complex implementation no matter how (im-)precise or should 
boost provide a truly precise complex class.

Regards,

M.

-- 
Matthieu Schaller