On Thursday, 7 June 2012 at 20:04:56 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 06/07/2012 08:34 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
I find this very ugly. To be honest, I would be much happier
without all
that mostNegative and common type stuff.
If I want to get the min
between a short and an int I'll just cast them appropriately.
The mostNegative and common type stuff is there to enable
correct semantics for taking the minimum of signed and unsigned
values. Minimum of short and int would work fine without that.
I know what it's there for, I don't think it is necessary. I
don't think people should be taking the min of signed and
unsigned values. I don't think it's worth cluttering the
implementation for this minor convenience.
I'd much rather have a simpler standard library than a
complicated one for the
sake of a little convenience.
'min' is not complicated.
It's more complicated than it could/should be:
T min(T)(T x, T y) { return x < y ? x : y; }
To be honest, I don't think the variadic argument versions are
necessary either as it is just duplicating the functionality of
reduce.
