Boost logo

Boost :

From: helmut.zeisel_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-10-21 08:53:16

--- In boost_at_y..., Daryle Walker <darylew_at_m...> wrote:
> on 10/20/01 5:59 AM, David Abrahams at david.abrahams_at_r... wrote:
> > I think it makes sense that you resolve the outstanding issues
with your
> > currently-accepted submissions (int/gcd) first, so that they can
be checked
> > in to the boost distribution. Does that make sense to you?
> I uploaded updated versions (both 7) of and
a little
> over a week ago, but no one responded.

I did:

Anyway, AFAIS we now have the following situation:
A major design goal of dlw_gcd was that it should unify
the GCD code existing in several boost libraries.

From the reactions of the owner of these libraries, however,
I get the impression that they are not willing
to use your code instead of their original one.

So a major effort should be to convince the owners
of these libraries that they indeed include your code.
AFAIK, there are still open questions:

An alternative solution could be that
you convince the boost community that
there is need to have now three GCD instead of two.
You could justify your additional GCD by additional features
such as that your GCD now works for all Euclidean rings.
This is indeed convincing for me,
but I fear that it is convincing for me only.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at