Re: smalleset() ( Re: [eigen] Householder.h: ::min() and operator<=)

[Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'd rather stick with std::numeric_limits::min():

std::numeric_limits has to be specialized for custom types anyways (it is one of the rare cases where users are welcomed to enter in the std namespace), and I don't see reason for exposing a different value for std::numeric_limits::min() and NumTraits::smallest()? The only advantage I see could be a clearer name (not sure smallest is really clearer though).

I know that we already have some aliases in NumTraits, but retrospectively I think this was a bad idea, it just make everything more confusing.

gael

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Peter <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Christoph,


Am 12.09.2016 um 10:57 schrieb Christoph Hertzberg:

If nobody objects against that, I'll patch this into the dev-branch. Especially, are there objections against or alternative suggestions for the naming? `lowest()` probably would be a bad choice, since this is what std calls what
we call `min()`.

The problem with std::min() is, that it has to be understood historically. The name is a bad choice,
since the behaviour is different for integer and floating point values .

> N.B.: The 1 must be T(1) here (in case T is not implicitly constructible from int). And perhaps we should document it as "lowest non-denormalized positive value".

Which would suggest lowest() as a name, which is however already used.

Best regards,
Peter