From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-23 10:22:34
"David Abrahams" wrote
> "Andy Little" writes:
> I don't see what the presence of numerator and denominator has to do
> with normalization.
They should be typedefs for the input parameters?
[cut]
>>> Is it daft to want my_rational<x,1> to be a conforming MPL integral
>>> constant?
>>
>> Who wants special cases?
>
> Who suggested a special case?
Whoever said , " Is it daft to want my_rational<x,1> to be a conforming MPL
integral constant?" .
>> integral constant can be converted to a
>> rational constant, but not necessarily the other way.
>
> Don't forget that the types are all known at compile-time. The usual
> runtime logic doesn't necessarily apply. A conversion from
> my_rational<x,1> to int_<x> is not a narrowing conversion.
Conversion is fine. Thats not what you said above. Actually I already use
conversions in my boosted version of my pqs library, so that user can use
integer rather than rational dimensions. It works fine.
cheers
Andy Little