Re: [boost] [rational] Which way should std::numeric_limits::min go?

Subject: Re: [boost] [rational] Which way should std::numeric_limits::min go?
From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-23 04:26:32

> From: john_at_[hidden]
> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 08:18:06 +0100
>
> I would treat it as a variant of the integer types, and set min() to the
> most negative value, and max() to the most positive value. I suppose
> denorm_min could be the smallest positive value, but I don't think there's
> any prior art for that.

The only built-in types that define denorm_min use that function to define min,
that's why I was thinking of using denorm_min for min too (instead of lowest, which
the built-in integers use).

I'm going to use some helper templates, since I'll have to use the component type's
numeric_limits, and I'll have to specialize on signed vs. unsigned, bounded vs.
unbounded, etc.

Daryle W.