Michael, thanks for the links. As for me, this page also has interesting info(and this page give me idea to provide math functions). http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/37636/Fixed-Point-Class Vicente Botet wrote
As I said there are several notations and there is no real one that would make happy everyone. So I think that the library should take in account this point and provide some aliases (c++11)/type traits(c++98) for the most common notations.
Choosing the default notation is critical and having a consensus on it would be difficult. Do you think that it is worth proposing several default notations and request the boost community to choose the default one?
Yes, of course, boost community should choose the default notation. What is the best way to provide several notations? That is less important issue, but I have question about the file structure. In the prototype all code in one file. But I think file structure may look like this: fixed_point.hpp - top level header fixed_point/cardinal.hpp fixed_point/integral.hpp fixed_point/nonnegative.hpp fixed_point/negatable.hpp fixed_point/functions.hpp fixed_point/common.hpp fixed_point/config.hpp I do not insist, but I think segregation better than one file, and want to know your opinion. P.S. The proposal. proposal_Dmitriy_Gorbel.pdf http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/file/n4646027/proposal_Dmitriy_Gorbel.pdf I think this is final version, or close to final. Sincerely, Dmitriy. -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/GSOC-2013-tp4645089p4646027.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.