Is it a good practice to overload math functions in namespace std in c++

问题

I am writing a C++ class which represents an arithmetic type (a c++ wrapper around mpfr), and I'd like to support some functions found in <cmath> (I'll take std::sqrt as an example).

So I have the following class:

namespace ns
{
  class MyClass
  {
      /* ... */
      public:
      friend MyClass sqrt(const MyClass& mc);
  };
}

And I can use it this way:

MyClass c;
/* ... */
MyClass d = ns::sqrt(c);
MyClass e = sqrt(c); // Apparently I don't have to specify ns::

But I cannot use it this way:

MyClass f = std::sqrt(c);

Compiler (g++ (Debian 4.7.2-5)) error is: "no matching function for call to sqrt(ns::MyClass&)".

This is normal, but it's a problem to me. I need this to be valid, because MyClass is supposed to be used into existing template functions (that I'm not supposed to modify). For example:

template <typename T>
void func(T a)
{
    /* ... */
    T c = std::sqrt(a);
    /* ... */
}
int main()
{
    func<float>(3);
    func<MyClass>(MyClass(3));
    /* ... */
}

The following piece of code actually resolve my problem:

namespace std
{
  using ns::sqrt;
}

But adding things into the std namespace seems very unnatural to me. I am afraid to run into unexpected troubles later, doing this.

Is it safe ? If not, why ?

Is there a better alternative ?

回答1:

It’s not safe, because it’s not legal (§17.6.4.2.1):

The behavior of a C++ program is undefined if it adds declarations or definitions to namespace std or to a namespace within namespace std unless otherwise specified. A program may add a template specialization for any standard library template to namespace std only if the declaration depends on a user-defined type and the specialization meets the standard library requirements for the original template and is not explicitly prohibited.

So you may add specialisations for your own types. You may not add overloads (or indeed anything else).

Your current code is the correct way of doing this.

回答2:

Adding stuff to namespace std is prohibited by the standard. The correct way to tackle this problem is normally seen with swap (that is available in the std namespace, but that can be specialized by user-defined types to work more efficiently): when a template function needs to use e.g. sqrt, it will do

using std::sqrt;
a=sqrt(b);

This way, for "regular" types it will use std::sqrt ("taken in" by the using statement), while for your type your overload will prevail due to Koenig lookup (which, incidentally, is the reason of the behavior you observed at // Apparently I don't have to specify ns::).

回答3:

The alternative, within generic functions, is to do this:

template <typename T>
void func(T a)
{
    using std::sqrt;

    /* ... */
    T c = sqrt(a);
    /* ... */
}

And defining additional things into the std-namespace is not safe in general (and not strictly legal).

回答4:

Not so good an idea to put it in std namespace.

Since you have your own namespace, you could import sqrt into your namespace and add specialized sqrt functions:

namespace ns {
  using std::sqrt;
  MyClass sqrt(const MyClass &)
}

ns::sqrt(...);

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22701354/is-it-a-good-practice-to-overload-math-functions-in-namespace-std-in-c

标签

c++

std

overloading

cmath