From: Hubert HOLIN (Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-25 17:34:39
Paris (U.E.), le 26/06/2001
[Sorry for the late reaction, I curently have an urgent
situation which is swamping me]
I have introduced a math folder but not a math namespace
because I understood that was what the final recommendations called
for. I can of course introduce the namespace math if it is deemed
I personaly would like to introduce that namespace, as it
could be a starting point to tidy-up and improve upon the existing math
support (for instance one could then have templated trig functions...).
I do not believe a quaternion or an octonion namespace is
called for, but a special_functions might, however.
The other point raised in that thread is a failure due to the
instanciation of "sin(octonion<int> const &)" and such which may (or
may not) be related to template-template parameters. I'll get a chance
to work on that tomorow.
At any rate, I believe these issues (and a few minor ones
which cropped up) should be resolved before the libraries are
integrated into a public release (by temporarily removing them from
public access if need be).
--- In boost_at_y..., Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_g...> 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
> Updates for the regression test results are in progress.
> Jens Maurer
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk