RE: [boost] Standard Constants?

From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-09 07:12:34

Glad to see that pedantry is alive and well!!

You will want to know that I also working on a uncertain variables system
(intervals extended with more information 
one of which is if exact like inch to meter factor)

However I would rule out extending a C++ Standard constants
collection to include physical constants too.
But lets do the easy math constants first?

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Hinnant [mailto:hinnant_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 11:30 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: RE: [boost] Standard Constants?
> 
> 
> Paul A. Bristow wrote on 7/7/2000 4:36 PM
> >(Physical constants, big G, speed of light etc are in a
> >quite different category I believe.  They are much less accurate,
> >never exact, but most useful of course.)
> 
> Just a bit of trivia that only interests geeks like me: :-)
> 
> The speed of light (in a vacuum) is now "exact".  In 1983 the 
> meter was 
> redefined in terms of the speed of light:  c = 2.99792458e+08 m/s (by 
> definition).
> 
> See pages such as: 
> http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/dates.htm for more 
> fun.
> 
> -Howard
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Make new friends, find the old at Classmates.com:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/5530/4/_/9351/_/963095397/
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> 
> 
> 
>