On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:56 AM, Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> wrote: [...]
Personally, I'd just supply two different classes and overload the appropriate functions rather than implementing a complicated generic version. It'd probably take less effort and be more pleasant to use (faster compiles and shorter template error messages). Having the two implementations to compare would also be an aid for more ambitious people.
If Chad doesn't wish to implement an efficient fixed size integer, and his existing one is consider unacceptable then it could be removed from xint, and left for someone else to implement. They don't need to share code to be interchangeable and if it's as important as you say, I'm sure someone will be willing to put the effort in.
IMO requirements for a fast fixed size integer shouldn't deny those who want a dynamically sized integer.
+1 to all 3 of above. - Jeff