Subject: Re: [boost] [multiprecision] Radix-2 typedef naming convention
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-06 04:07:31
> Oh yeah. You're right again, and I flubbed up again. Thanks.
>> How about:
> 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?
One other suggestion:
which keeps the "cuteness" and link to the names of the hardware types, but
the cpp_ prefix indicates it's a software emulation?