[C++-sig] Re: indexing_v2 status update
s_sourceforge at nedprod.com
Sat Jan 24 15:19:50 CET 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 24 Jan 2004 at 12:24, Raoul Gough wrote:
> > Surely you can use long long or __int64 as template parameters?
> I guess so - on compilers that support one or the other. long long is
> (still) not part of the C++ standard, AFAIK.
If I remember the standard only guarantees some very short recursion
depths for templates and macros which if observed, parts of Boost
Also on most 64 bit compilers, long becomes 64 bit. We'll be in 64
bit land sooner than we might think.
You're dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. My vote is that you
choose whatever is the simplest, easiest to maintain mechanism with a
bias towards faster compile times.
> > Also, CUJ had an article about implementing infinite length numbers
> > at compile time using templates. May be useful here.
> I haven't seen that issue - is it available online? Anyway I would
> guess that the same worry about complexity and notation applies. It's
> a common question as to whether you should complicate the current
> implementation in preparation for possible extensions in the future.
> If those extensions never become necessary, you've created a lot more
> effort (including implementation, documentation, maintenance, user
> confusion, etc.) for no actual benefit.
Yes the CUJ article I refer to is online - look in the experts forum.
I have no income, therefore can't afford anything not free - hence
the nasty 33k modem connection to the net I must put up with :(
If I understand things correctly, these changes shouldn't affect
client code ie; how I've used your indexing library won't require
more than recompiling to use any changed mechanism you decide upon.
Therefore it's perfectly reasonable to go with the simple method now
if you maintain the option to enhance the internals later if demand
Put it this way Raoul - you've done a bang up job on that suite, but
some people would prefer what's done already now and aren't really
too bothered if it's "perfect" or not, whatever "perfect" might be.
Think of all the other useful projects you could be engaged upon! :)
Ultimately Dave's the arbiter, if he's happy with long based bitmaps
then it's cool. Dave's got a high quality threshold so if he okay's
it, it's good enough.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: idw's PGP-Frontend 18.104.22.168 / 9-2003 + PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Cplusplus-sig