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

Subject: Re: [boost] [multiprecision] Radix-2 typedef naming convention
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-06 12:04:19

> I'm not a user of Boost.Multiprecision, but maybe namespaces would do
> a better job in distinguishing the types? Injecting various tags into
> the type names feels like C-style.
>
> Or maybe a trait to construct the necessary type:
>
> template< unsigned int Bits >
> struct floating_point
> {
>    typedef ... hardware_type; // optional
>    typedef ... emulated_type;
>    typedef ... type; // hw, if available, emulated otherwise
> };
>
> typedef floating_point< 32 >::type my_float32_t;
>
> Just some thoughts...

Lets not over complicate these :-)

Actually I'm pretty sure these typedefs will be hardly ever used, but 
they're useful for exposition.

John.