From: Ed Brey (brey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-25 11:50:57
From: "Jens Maurer" <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]>
> The "tailored_constants" stuff is needlessly complicating the
> because that means that the user would need to explicitly write
> tailored_constants<T>::... wherever he wishes to get the really
> constants. The precision of the constants is basically a Quality-of-
> implementation issue for the constants<> template.
I feel your pain; I'd like to have the simpler interface, too. The
problem I see is that it is not possible for an implementer to choose a
single best implementation for all users of the platform. Some users
will want constant folding and some will want binary (i.e. hand-crafted)
precision. It's not a matter of one implementation being higher quality
than the other; it's just a matter of having different tools available
for different jobs.
See also http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/message/11293.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk