RE: [boost] Re: proposal: safe arithmetic class

2003-01-16 Thread Bjorn . Karlsson
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > The huge advantage appears when you start looking at arithmetic > expressions. The result of > > if (t < u) > { > x = y + z * w; > } > > could be a lot more predictable if we were working with types that > didn't perform implicit lossy c

Re: [boost] Re: proposal: safe arithmetic class

2003-01-16 Thread David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> From: Thorsten Ottosen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > What would the advantage be over using boost::numeric_cast >> directly, and >> > thus explicitly? >> >> you would't have to worry about if you forgot a numeric_cast >> somewhere in >> your code >> or if you com

RE: [boost] Re: proposal: safe arithmetic class

2003-01-15 Thread Bjorn . Karlsson
> From: Thorsten Ottosen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > What would the advantage be over using boost::numeric_cast > directly, and > > thus explicitly? > > you would't have to worry about if you forgot a numeric_cast > somewhere in > your code > or if you compiled on a platform with different r