"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote
2. What changes or additions would people like to see?
One could make some modifications to rational to make them it user friendly. For example the following results in a compile time failure n VC7.1: boost::rational<int> r1; boost::rational<long> r2; r1 + r2; Naturally if a bigint rational was to be used, I would expect rational<bigint>() + rational<int>() to work. This is fairly trivial to accomplish using BOOST_TYPEOF: eg something like template <typename Lhs, typename Rhs> typename boost::enable_if< // only for compat with current header boost::mpl::not_< boost::is_same< Lhs, Rhs> >, rational<typename BOOST_TYPEOF(Lhs() + Rhs())> >::type operator + (rational<Lhs> const & lhs, rational<Rhs> const& rhs); FWIW this applies as well to other UDTs including interval and complex. which are currently inconsistent eg std:::complex<double> d ; d * 2; // fails to compile d *= 2; // compiles ok regards Andy Little