id,summary,reporter,owner,description,type,status,milestone,component,version,severity,resolution,keywords,cc
6495,consider implementing traits for numeric types in terms of numeric_limits,Robert Ramey,John Maddock,"The following type traits

is_signed, is_unsigned, is_float, is_integral, are currently implemented by checking against a list of numeric primitives. so far so good.

But what happens when one specializes numeric_limits for his own new wizbang numeric type like big_integer, arbitrary_length integer, modular_integer, safe_integer, safe_float, etc. etc.  I ideally I would expect to see that the above type traits should ""just work"" but they won't under the current implementation.

Note that specializing std::numeric_limits is permited by the current standard for one's own types (though not for types in the std namespace) so this is an actual problem rather than a hypothetical one.

The would leave make_signed, make_unsigned a little bit out in the cold as they're implementation can't be done in terms of std::numeric_limits.

admittedly, is_integral might not fit here as it has a very specific meaning, but I think my concern applies to the other ones for regardless.

Robert Ramey

",Feature Requests,closed,To Be Determined,type_traits,Boost 1.48.0,Problem,invalid,"is_signed, is_unsigned, is_float, is_integral",