"David Abrahams" wrote
"Andy Little" writes:
I am arguing for a normalised version, so for my_rational<2,8>, my_rational<3,12> and my_rational<5,20> among others, the normalised version is my_rational<1,4> and thats what I think rational<...>::type should return.
Why should that normalization be done eagerly? I can see no good reason for it.
Numerator and denominator members are evaluated already . I guess you could remove them.... [cut]
Is it daft to want my_rational<x,1> to be a conforming MPL integral constant?
Who wants special cases? integral constant can be converted to a rational constant , but not necessarily the other way. numerator<T> and denominator<T> functions are provided for integration with integral constants. regards Andy Little