Re: [boost] [math][integer] Moving integer utilities out of the math lib.

Subject: Re: [boost] [math][integer] Moving integer utilities out of the math lib.
From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-16 20:11:21

> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 16:50:09 +0100
> From: vicente.botet_at_[hidden]
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [math][integer] Moving integer utilities out of the math lib.
> 
> Le 10/01/15 13:21, John Maddock a écrit :This does look to me like a 
> good idea, but to remain coherent, all of 
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_57_0/libs/math/doc/html/gcd_lcm.html 
> should move, which means:
> >
> > common_factor.hpp
> > common_factor_rt.hpp
> > common_factor_ct.hpp
> >
> > Plus docs and tests.
> >
> > Further I'd like to see the headers under boost/integer/*.hpp and the 
> > namespace changed to boost::integer.  For backwards compatibility the 
> > boost/math/*.hpp headers should be present also but merely include the 
> > new ones and import the symbols into boost::math via using declarations.
> >
> > One SNAFU I see is that boost.integer is a largely unmaintained ragbag 
> > of utilities (though often very useful). 
> I believed that Daryle Walker was maintaining it, but now that I see 
> that the last closed fix was 5 years ago I agree that it is 
> unmaintained. Anyway the library has 4 authors: Beman Dawes, Daryle 
> Walker, Gennaro Prota andJohn Maddock. No one of the other authors want 
> to maintain this simple ;-) library? Beman? John? I don't mind if someone else wants to take over. I got bogged down trying to modernize it (which was so long ago that it would need re-modernizing if I ever uploaded it) and not getting how to do uploads. (The bug fixes I did with Rational were the only ones I've successfully uploaded by myself to an official release.) I do occasionally check my e-mail if whoever takes over has questions.
> > It would be nice if someone would take responsibility for this 
> > library: any takers?  It might be the right time too to move the rest 
> > of Boost.Integer into boost::integer rather than dumping everything in 
> > namespace boost?
> >
> >
> > Does that look like a plan?  Anyone care to take it on?
> >
> I think so. The logical structure must be preserved.
> Some years ago, I mentored a Bits Ints GSoC project that falls in this 
> category that added a lot of ct and rt facilities for ints.
> If no one of the current authors want to take care of the maintenance of 
> this library I could do it, but I would like Beman and John, you help on 
> this task also.