Subject: Re: [boost] [constrained_value] Constrained Value review results
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-08 14:52:08
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Kawulak" <robert.kawulak_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [constrained_value] Constrained Value review results
2010/10/8 vicente.botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>:
> I was wondering if we could not use Boost.Ratio to specify compile time bounds for boost::rational. So instead of
>
> bounded<rational, quarter2type, half2type>::type my_rational(rational(1, 2));
>
> we can do
>
> static_bounded<rational, ratio<1,4>, ratio<1,2> >::type my_rational(rational(1, 2));
Not static_bounded, but rather bounded<rational, ratio<1,4>, ratio<1,2> >::type.
ratio<1,4> is a type, not a compile time constant.
Once again I'll try to explain – static_bounded (bounded_int,
bounded_ct or whatever we call it) is not exactly for bounds fixed at
compile time, but for bounds values of which can be expressed by
compile time constants.
> We can consider that ratio is the rational_constant of rational as integral_constant is the tpe constant for integral types. Of cousre, we will need to use a comparator that would be able to compare ratio and rational.
>
> template <intmax_t N, intmax_t D>
> bool operator<(rational<intmax_t> const& lhs, ratio<N,D> rhs);
> template <intmax_t N, intmax_t D>
> bool operator<(ratio<N,D> lhs, rational<intmax_t> const& rhs);
Or even simpler – make ratio implicitly convertible to rational.
Either way, the best place for this functionality is probably the
rational class.
Best regards,
Robert
_______________________________________________
Sorr bau I dont see the difference. I consider ratio<N,D> to express a compile time constant through a type, as integral_c or integral_constant do.
If ratio is converible to rational, all the optimizations oportunities could be lost as we will compare two run time types.
Best,
Vicente