"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > But, IIUC, if operator< is not provided, you'd oppose a std::less
> > specialization, right?
>
> Right. When there is one and only one strict weak ordering (equality) for
a
> type, not using operator< and operator== because some us
Hello Eric,
"Eric Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Dirk Schreib wrote:
> > [...]
> > In this example
> >
> > typedef boost::variant V;
> > V v1 = T1( x );
> > V v2 = T2( y );
> > V v3 = T1( z );
> >
> > v1 <
"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> "Eric Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > std::set< my_variant, boost::variant_less >
>
> I had the same thought myself, though I'd be inclined to spend a
> little time searching for a better name than "less", since it doesn't
> really mean that.
Hello Mike,
I completly agree with your your statement.
> The IEEE 754 revision committee has added decimal formats (32, 64,
> and 128 bits) to the proposed new Floating-point standard, along
> with full DFP arithmetic.
> May I suggest that the class be changed to implement the proposed IEEE
> 7
Hello Boost,
I looked around (not only at boost) and found no "suitable"
C++ class for decimal floating points.
What I mean with "suitable" is best described with the
background from the excellent web pages at
http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/decimal/ .
Similiar to the Decimal8 encoding, I need:
- E
