Subject: Re: [boost] a safe integer library
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-12-11 15:49:59
On 12/10/15 3:07 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> minor comments:
> * I see that boost::numeric::safe and std::safe differ on the template
I'm not seeing this. The boost type signature includes two optional
type parameters. So the template signature (excepting namespace) is
identical between the std and boost versions.
I see why the standard version is not configurable and just
> throws. However, I don't see why this doesn't applies to the proposal
> for Boost.
> What is not good for the standard can be good for Boost?
I think I answered this. The standard version is subset of the Boost
version. The are compatible - but the boost version has additional
functionality which is more cumbersome to implement and requires more
investment of effort on the part of the user to understand. std
is a subset of the boost one.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk