Paul A. Bristow wrote:
Having given this matter some thought before Chris laid ideas for your input, perhaps I can give my twopennyworth.
multiprecision really is the right name for both a library Boost.Multiprecision, and thus for the enclosing namespace boost::multiprecision.
All the 'Big' variant names seem passé, and not quite right - or example, we *could* include floating-point types with smaller precision than float - for embedded systems. Who needs 6 decimal digits precision for a toaster ;-)
Abbreviating the library name to MP is just acronymitis (and raises hackles of those who have already 'claimed' the letter letters M and P for various other purposes).
Adding a trailing _ is ugly, and confused with similar nasty conventions like member functions/data, so this is an 'over my dead body' proposal.
The shortness of real is neat, though I agree it is not strictly mathematically right. I could live with floating, integer (integral?) and rational.
So FWIW, I'll go with boost::multiprecision::floating, integer and rational
Paul
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well said. And allow me to throw out a big thanks to everyone who contributed. We need to wrap this one up for the weekend. * I believe we received more positive feedback for "a variation of float...", neither real nor decimal. * The consensus seems to be that the namespace mp is terse and confusing. * Some like the trailing underscore. Most, however, do not favor it. Let's go with this. namespace boost { namespace multiprecision { class floating { }; } } So this is the last call for anyone who can't live with it. After this weekend or next, I expect to have refactored the e_float code accordingly. Sincerely, Chris.