Rice distribution

[Paolo Carlini]

On 09/06/2012 12:34 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
> What do you guys think?
Great idea. But let's make sure everything is consistent and up to date, 
as Ulrich also noticed, both in terms of code and testcases.

Also, well, we still have to make the final decision whether we want 
__rice_distribution or rice_distribution. You see, Ed, your nice offer 
made me think that in fact it's not *obvious* *which* additional 
distributions will be standardized at the next occasion... that seems a 
further argument in favor of just going with the double underscore in 
front, for now. In case, adding "unuglified" typedefs will be trivial...

Paolo.