On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 17:50:48 -0700, Jonathan Turkanis <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote:
I can't tell what template parameters you think rational should have.
(it is because i don't know myself :O) i think we need two parameters: one for specifying the precision, and one for specifying the variant to use the problems: 1. if we specify the precision as an integer, e.g. rational<1000> meaning a rational with numerator range (-1000,1000) and denominator range (1,1000), then we restrict the possible underlying types to the integer type used as the template parameter (and smaller) a possible workaround is to specify the log of the limits instead, so e.g. rational<31> would mean (-2^31,2^31) and (1,2^31) -- this is less flexible, than the above one, but i can't come up with anything better 2. i don't know how can we implement the selection of UDTs: let's say i have implemented a modular arithmetic bigint type, with up to a few hundred bits of precision -- how can i tell rational that it can select this as the underlying type? <snip>
The above declaration was based on the assumption that multiple rounding policies should be supported. If there's only one way to round, then rounding can be merged into the checking policy.
i don't see how this depends on having more than one kind of rounding: either you round, or you check, cannot do both at the same time -- do i miss something? br, andras