From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-28 20:04:08
At 06:47 PM 6/28/2001, David Abrahams wrote:
>I think we need to think carefully about library issues 225 and 229 when
>proceeding down the path of defining generalized free math functions.
I'm sorry, maybe it is too close to bedtime, but I couldn't relate your
discussion, interesting though it was, to Hubert's namespace proposal.
Or was it more a case of a train of thought that got kicked off by his
proposal, but doesn't actually bear on whether or not we should have a
namespace boost::math with sub-namespace boost::math::special_functions?
Confused in Virginia,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk