Re: [Boost-users] [math][tools][units] generic libraries notgenericenough

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [math][tools][units] generic libraries notgenericenough
From: Michael Powell (mwpowellnm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-27 19:24:11

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> on Sat Aug 27 2011, John Maddock <boost.regex-AT-virgin.net> wrote:
>
> > * Should we have a single unified concept for all number types in
> > Boost.... if yes what happens when the next latest and greatest
> > library comes along and requires slightly different concepts to
> > function efficiently?  What I'm saying is it's pretty hard to get this
> > right.
>
> This is to say nothing of the semantic vagaries of limited-precision
> floating point.  It's almost impossible to even create reliable
> mathematical concepts that accomodate floats, doubles, et. al.
>

Ain't that the plain truth. I can't speak for accommodating floats, doubles,
etc. We pretty much decided to go with float or Single across the board for
precision reasons for what we're doing.

--
> Dave Abrahams
> BoostPro Computing
> http://www.boostpro.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>