«

I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.

Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?


--
Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>

On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
<newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>
> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>
> --
> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>

No it wouldn't be good.

sumsin wrote:
> On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
>> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
>> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>>
>> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
>> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>
> No it wouldn't be good.
Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.

Which wouldn't be good, and more importantly, *why*?

--
Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>

On Jun 7, 11:00 am, Daniel Pitts
<newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
> sumsin wrote:
> > On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
> > <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
> >> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
> >> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>
> >> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
> >> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>
> >> --
> >> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>
> > No it wouldn't be good.
>
> Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>
> Which wouldn't be good, and more importantly, *why*?
>
> --
> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>

because std namespace is meant for standard utilities and your
semantics for 'abs' function is not standard from the language
perspective thats why i am suggesting no. So keep it into your custom
namespace.

Daniel Pitts wrote:

> sumsin wrote:
>> On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
>> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
>>> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
>>> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>>>
>>> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
>>> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>>
>> No it wouldn't be good.
> Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>
> Which wouldn't be good,

Putting it into namespace std.

> and more importantly, *why*?

One reason would be because the C++ standard forbids it.

On Jun 7, 7:10*am, sumsin <sumsin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:00 am, Daniel Pitts
>
>
>
>
>
> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
> > sumsin wrote:
> > > On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
> > > <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
> > >> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
> > >> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>
> > >> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
> > >> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>
> > >> --
> > >> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>
> > > No it wouldn't be good.
>
> > Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>
> > Which wouldn't be good, and more importantly, *why*?
>
> > --
> > Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>
> because std namespace is meant for standard utilities and your
> semantics for 'abs' function is not standard from the language
> perspective thats why i am suggesting no. So keep it into your custom
> namespace.

Or you could do:

namespace super_std {

using namespace std;

/* Put more stuff here */
}

Rolf Magnus wrote:
> Daniel Pitts wrote:
>
>> sumsin wrote:
>>> On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
>>> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
>>>> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
>>>> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>>>>
>>>> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to put
>>>> an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was created?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>>> No it wouldn't be good.
>> Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>>
>> Which wouldn't be good,
>
> Putting it into namespace std.
>
>> and more importantly, *why*?
>
> One reason would be because the C++ standard forbids it.
>

I thought it was OK to add template specializations in std::

red floyd wrote:

> Rolf Magnus wrote:
>> Daniel Pitts wrote:
>>
>>> sumsin wrote:
>>>> On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
>>>> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
>>>>> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
>>>>> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to
>>>>> put an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was
>>>>> created?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>>>> No it wouldn't be good.
>>> Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>>>
>>> Which wouldn't be good,
>>
>> Putting it into namespace std.
>>
>>> and more importantly, *why*?
>>
>> One reason would be because the C++ standard forbids it.
>>
>
> I thought it was OK to add template specializations in std::

Yes, but the OP wants to add an overload, not a template specialization.

Rolf Magnus wrote:
> red floyd wrote:
>
>> Rolf Magnus wrote:
>>> Daniel Pitts wrote:
>>>
>>>> sumsin wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 7, 6:48 am, Daniel Pitts
>>>>> <newsgroup.spamfil...@virtualinfinity.net> wrote:
>>>>>> I've created a class with semantics such that it makes sense to call
>>>>>> std::abs(foo) and get a (double) result.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it sensible to add to the std namespace, or would it be better to
>>>>>> put an "abs" function it in the same namespace as my class was
>>>>>> created?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
>>>>> No it wouldn't be good.
>>>> Thanks for the ambiguous response, it's very helpful.
>>>>
>>>> Which wouldn't be good,
>>> Putting it into namespace std.
>>>
>>>> and more importantly, *why*?
>>> One reason would be because the C++ standard forbids it.
>>>
>> I thought it was OK to add template specializations in std::
>
> Yes, but the OP wants to add an overload, not a template specialization.
>

Isn't std::abs a template?

red floyd wrote:


>>>>> Which wouldn't be good,
>>>> Putting it into namespace std.
>>>>
>>>>> and more importantly, *why*?
>>>> One reason would be because the C++ standard forbids it.
>>>>
>>> I thought it was OK to add template specializations in std::
>>
>> Yes, but the OP wants to add an overload, not a template specialization.
>>
>
> Isn't std::abs a template?

Well, there is an std::abs template, but only for std::valarray:

template<class T> valarray<T> abs (const valarray<T>&);

The rest are just overloads.