From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-25 11:19:24
At 05:14 PM 10/23/01 -0600, Greg Colvin wrote:
>The only problems I see with the template function approach is
>the extra typing:
> v = pi
>is certainly easier than
> v = constant<pi_tag,double>
>but it is not amenable to more precise implementations.
>How about a compromise:
> v = pi<double>()
>and so on for all the other constants? I think this can be
>made to work with even the most brain-dead compilers.
Please do not make any design decisions for math constants based on
I'm writing this from the C++ committee meeting. Compiler vendor after
compiler vendor is stating publicly that the Boost libraries have become so
important that they are being added to the vendor's regression tests.
Customers are demanding that 100% of the tests pass. The critical mass
demand we all dreamed about actually seems to be happening.
The exact form of the constants will be very, very important in user
decisions to use the library, and committee decisions to add the library to
the C++ standard. Please don't make compromises for broken compilers.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk