From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-20 14:43:22
At 10:37 AM 12/20/99 -0000, Moore, Paul wrote:
>But I still think that removing abs() is better. Can anybody who is
>genuinely attached to having an abs() function for rationals, please
>up. Otherwise it goes. I'd like to get a working version of
>released. I can put abs() back in version N, when the larger issues
>whole topic have been clarified.
Stick in a comment as to why you removed abs(). If someone comes
along later and wants abs(), that will give them a head start.
>If no-one starts a "save the abs" campaign, I'll produce a demo
>exposes the problem clearly.
Sooner or later software has to ship to be useful. It won't be the
first or last time a developer had to leave something out and just
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk