From: Alberto Ganesh Barbati (abarbati_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-24 12:47:18
Andy Little ha scritto:
> BTW An alternate signature for the function:
>
> template <typename T>
> struct compare_absolute_error /*not derived from binary_function!*/ {
> T eps;
> compare_absolute_error(T eps_) : eps(eps_) {}
>
> //Signature as thus to prevent too many conversions
> template <typename T1, typename T2>
> bool operator()(T1 const & x, T2 const & y) const { return abs(x - y) < eps; }
> };
>
> // ............. possible useage :
>
> compare_absolute_error<int> comp(1);
>
> int pixel_x =100;
> float current_pos_x = 100.5;
>
> bool grabbed = comp(current_pos_x, pixel_x);
>
The idea is nice, but in this particular case I think the "fixed"
version is more suitable. First: the user can be sure about what
approximation is going to be used for the comparison (in the realm of
floating point, it's a big help). Second: knowing the type in advance
allows you to deal correctly with corner cases (infinities, denorm,
etc.). With the member-template approach that you suggest you would have
to handle more cases and it might easily get tedious.
Ganesh