Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Christopher Kormanyos <e_float@yahoo.com>wrote:
From: Matthias Schabel <boost@schabel-family.org> To: boost@lists.boost.org Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 12:00 AM Subject: Re: [boost] Name and Namespace for Potential Boost Extended Floating-Point
mp_float mp_int mp_rational
+1
If this is going to be in the "multiprecision" namespace, isn't "mp_*" redundant? Why not just
multiprecision::float multiprecision::int multiprecision::rational
$0.02
---------------------------------------------------
No, unfortunately not. Please remember when using a namespace, a name like "float" can not be distinguished from the POD type float. Remember that many developers *use* a namespace to avoid typing.
The ugly prefix is needed to guarantee unique naming.
Couldn't you just do what "every" other boost library does, and append an underscore?
In the interest of clarity I would prefer to see mp_float and not float_ in user code that *use* the namespace. float_ in no way intuitively means multiprecision floating point data type. Intuitively, I would expect float_ in a boost library would mean a type that wraps a literal floating point value in a type for metaprogramming and might be declared something like: template <float f> float_ : float_c<f>; Regards, Luke