Re: New numeric_limits traits for C++-0x.

[Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net>]

Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 02/24/2010 02:59 PM, 3dw4rd@verizon.net wrote:
>   
> > Greetings,
> >
> > This adds lowest() and max_digits10 to 
> >   
> >     
> Also, why __glibcxx_max_digits10 takes also RADIX, if you are always
> using it with __FLT_RADIX__?
>
> Paolo.
>
>   
The radix was a leftover from when I thought I needed this for integral 
types.  The max_decimal10 are all zero for integral types.
I was about to take it out when I thought we'll need to do this for 
decimal types someday.  (I think we are responsible for decimal 
additions to other headers.  Later.)

I can take it out for now if you want.

I was being bone headed about the static const members.  Of course they 
need definition.  I'll do that in limits.cc (actually limits_c++0x.cc).

Now about gnu.ver.  What if the new symbols are already covered by an 
existing pattern?  Can I just add a new empty version?

Thanks,

Ed