RE: [boost] Math Constants Library formal review results

From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-17 12:13:39

Matt Austern wrote

> I'm not convinced that 1 and 0 belong in a numeric constants class; they
> seem more like things that belong in a numeric type traits class, or maybe
> even something that's still more general.  There are plenty of types for
> which you can reasonably ask for the additive or multiplicative identity
> element, but where these transcendental constants make no sense.
> (Integers,
> NxN matrices, quaternions,...  There's a sensible "zero" even for
> strings.)

Agree with what you say

 - but since math_constants in a separate namespace,
is there any significant disadvantage
to having them with other numeric constants?
Completeness has some merit?
Some people find the word 'zero' nicer than '0.'?

Paul

Dr Paul A Bristow, hetp Chromatography
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, Cumbria
LA8 8AB      UK
[phone]
mailto:pbristow_at_[hidden]