Re: [boost] Compile-time power of a run-time base

From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-05 12:28:15

AMDG

John Maddock wrote:
> Ah yes, forgot that.  My gut feeling is that Boost.Math should concentrate 
> on the um... math: provide a nice simple implementation that's reasonably 
> efficient too.  And libraries like Boost.Units can overload it for 
> dimentioned-quantities, and use the Boost.Math version for the internal 
> calculation.  Does this make sense?
>   

Unfortunately, calls like pow<1>(x) will not use ADL.  So it becomes 
difficult to
write generic functions.

> I guess the question is can we evaluate half-powers more efficiently than 
> just using pow?  Maybe, but it's not so obvious to me as it is for smallish 
> integer powers.

Not that I know of.  I'm more interested in polymorphism than performance.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe