-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I'd leave doing work on docs and testing until you get more positive feedback.
Doxygen can work well (especially when used with Quickbook, but needs to have useful comments in the C++ code to be more than a list of classes, functions...). (I used to think Doxygen was used as an excuse not to write docs ;-)
That was the impression that I've gotten about it too. The docs that I've seen written with it are close to useless, not much better than simply reading the source code. I try to make my documentation more useful than that.
I did put an example in, in the documentation -- the Fibonacci example.
Sorry I didn't spot these - I expected to find in an /examples subfolder.
As I said, I can put it there too, if it would be useful. I usually go to the documentation first, and figured most other people would too. For larger examples, I'd definitely put them there, and just provide a link in the docs.
[...] is not encouraging, for reasons unclear.
http://www.linux2you.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2008/n2598.html
gives the status of the above along with N1744 Michiel Slaters on which yours is based as "open" rather than rejected.
But should not necessarily deter you :-)
A working Boost library in widespread use might change things?
It would also keep programmers that prefer to use C++ from being forced to Python or another language, just for the large integer support. :-)
(But the ghost of GMP's GPL licence haunts Big Integer proposals. As I've said elsewhere, a really good solution must be switchable to use GMP, if your license requirements permit).
I can see the desirability of that. But that said, it shouldn't be all that difficult to write a wrapper for pretty much any external library, to adapt it to whatever interface xint ends up using. I'm aiming for a Boost-licensed native C++ implementation for now, as that seems to be what has been missing to date.
PS Would you collaborate with a GSoC student to do the Boost-style docs and tests, and more examples?
I'm willing, though I don't really think there's enough work for more than one person.
PS I note it doesn't (yet) specialise std::numeric_limits?
I've put it on the to-do list.
I think NaN *is* meaningful for your integer type. However this is a minor detail that can added later.
I agree, and I'll add it to the numeric_limits definition. - -- Chad Nelson Oak Circle Software, Inc. * * * -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkutNxwACgkQp9x9jeZ9/wRMOgCaA64AYS0/oByVjSOL3yPMUwp4 Y7wAniY5prMF2niuvnF9Zn1ZW1EqibMM =DbTR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----