on 26.03.2010 at 8:41 Chad Nelson wrote :
Hi! I'm a long-time user (and admirer) of the Boost libraries, and I've just uploaded a new one to the Boost Vault for consideration: the Extended Integer (XInt) library, a unlimited-precision integer library that I've been working on for the last few months. I'd like to request a preliminary review of it, please.
I know I was supposed to "determine interest" first, but I've seen posts going back at least five years, expressing a desire for such a library, so I didn't think that was really necessary in this case. :-)
It's not perfect. The code is complete, as is the documentation text. But it doesn't yet support auto-linking or Windows DLLs, I'm not sure how the test suite would fit into the Boost test system, and I'm not sure I've got the Jamfile correct. But it should be sufficient for experimental use and review, and I'm eager to hear what you guys think of it.
(I'm writing this in the wee hours of March 26th, I hope it isn't held in the moderation queue for too long.)
i had a look at the docs and i find the lib pretty cool the docs seem pretty clear to me (even though i don't like this plain style of docs) i didn't evaluate the implementation and haven't tried to test it i have a copuple of suggestions first, to make 'xint::integer' consistent (if i were you) i'd make all public member functions non-member friend functions because 'int' and other fundamentals have no member functions and second, the docs lack algorithmic complexity estimation for operations as an end user i would like to know the order of time and/or space an operation will cost me BTW i like the presence of implicit sharing my only question is can i make it (the sharing) thread safe by defining 'XINT_THREADSAFE'? (hm... here arises a question about operations thread safety notes in the docs) i don't like the template constructor however you can ignore this point since i can not provide any arguments yet what about compile time fixed precision ints? like 'xint::fixed<128>' with '128' denoting number of bits (or bytes?) -- Pavel