From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-21 15:30:07
Phil Richards wrote:
> It's nice to see that there appears to be a move in the direction
> of separating the dimensional analysis and units into orthogonal
> bits, though. It's the way I've gone... :-)
More than that - I believe its the only way something like this (which is
really needed) is going to get into boost at all.
I think that it would be best to start with a dimensional analysis library
and not worry about units at all until latter. I subsequent units library -
there might be several would be built as "users" of the dimensional analysis
This way, there would be a lot less to try to agree upon.
layer 1 dimensional analysis core
layer 2 specific dimension systems - usages of the above library - probably
more than one
layer 3 units core - extension of dimensional analysis library
layer 4 specifice units systems.
Now I know from experience that lots of people will find say - "if it
doesn't include xyz... its just useless". Well, those people are wrong. If
sufficient number of people find the lower levels useful, it can accepted
eventhough not eveyone wants to use it.
Also it would make the library(ies) much easier to understand and use.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk