Re: [boost] Special functions, octonions, quaternions in the CVS

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-23 09:40:06

At 04:16 AM 6/23/2001, Jens Maurer wrote:

 >The special functions, octonions, and quaternions by Hubert Holin
 >are now added to the CVS.
 >
 >They're in a new sub-directory libs/math (and boost/math), expected
 >to contain other libraries in the future.  However, I just noticed
 >that the namespace is still boost::octonion (and not
 >boost::math::octonion).  Is this something to worry about regarding
 >consistency?

It seems to me namespaces should follow an "optimal branching" strategy 
similar to the one John Maddock has described for libraries.  The hierarchy 
should neither be so flat that there are large numbers of entries at each 
level, nor so tall and deep that there are only one entry at many levels.

So boost::math seems right to me for the 1st and 2nd levels.  If octonion's 
introduce many names then there should be a third level - 
boost::math::octonion, but if they only introduce one or two names, there 
shouldn't be a third level.  (Sorry, I don't remember if that is the case 
or not for that library.)

We haven't really been following an "optimal branching" policy for the 
boost namespace in the past, but as the number of names grows, we need to 
agree on such a policy and start applying it regularly, I think.

If we can agree, we should also add the namespace policy to our 
Requirements and Guidelines.

--Beman