OK, I will keep is_odd(), and delete is_even() because it is equal to !is_odd(). Is this OK with you? Regards, Maarten. "Hervé Brönnimann" <hbr@poly.edu> wrote in message news:77875A54-ED2A-4BC5-A840-522E3723B72D@poly.edu...
The counting starts with bit number 0. So is_odd now becomes lowest_bit() == 0.
But isn't lowest_bit() != 0 an overkill for checking that a number is even? (I mean, first computing the order of the lowest_bit, then comparing to 0...) I think there is room for lowest_bit / highest_bit as well as for is_odd and is_even. Perhaps it will be more readable than the idiom "integer(x) %2 == 0". -- Hervé Brönnimann CIS, Polytechnic University hbr@poly.edu _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost