Re: [boost] [multiprecision] Radix-2 typedef naming convention

Subject: Re: [boost] [multiprecision] Radix-2 typedef naming convention
From: Christopher Kormanyos (e_float_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-05 15:05:06

>> Why not name the new radix-2 multiprecision types as follows?
>> * boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_24
>> * boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_53
>> * boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_113
>> * and the one for octuple precision

> Sorry but that doesn't really work either - up until now we have 
> consistently used:

float_type_N

> to mean "Floating point type with at least N decimal digits", this is used 
> consistently not only in cpp_dec_float, but in binary floating point types 
> such as mpfr_float and mpf_float where we have typedefs such as:

Oh yeah. You're right again, and I flubbed up again. Thanks.

> How about:
> cpp_bin_float_single;
> cpp_bin_float_double;
> cpp_bin_float_quad;

Fine with me! Those are good names --- consistent with
existing Boost style, easy to recognize, and unambiguous.
Can we get a consensus on those names?

Paul?
Others?

Thanks for your patience.

Sincerely, Chris.

On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 5:53 PM, John Maddock <john_at_[hidden]> wrote:
 
>Thank you for this astute observation. In fact, we already
>have a proposal for optional typedefs such as float32_t,
>float64_t, and float128_t. They are to be defined in the global
>and std namespaces, and they are to be placed in new headers
><stdfloat.h> and <cstdfloat>, respectively.
>

>Why not name the new radix-2 multiprecision types as follows?
>* boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_24
>* boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_53
>* boost::multiprecision::cpp_bin_float_113
>* and the one for octuple precision

Sorry but that doesn't really work either - up until now we have 
consistently used:

float_type_N

to mean "Floating point type with at least N decimal digits", this is used 
consistently not only in cpp_dec_float, but in binary floating point types 
such as mpfr_float and mpf_float where we have typedefs such as:

typedef something mpfr_float_50;
typedef something mpfr_float_100;

Which each have enough binary digits to guarantee 50 and 100 decimal place 
precision respectively.

So cpp_bin_float follows this and also has:

typedef something cpp_bin_float_50;
typedef something cpp_bin_float_100;

So bit counts have to use a different naming convention to avoid confusion.

How about:

cpp_bin_float_single;
cpp_bin_float_double;
cpp_bin_float_quad;

?

John. 

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost