Re: [boost] Re: Standardization of Boost libraries

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-07 08:40:41

----- Original Message -----
From: "Toon Knapen" <toon.knapen_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 3:18 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Standardization of Boost libraries

> On Wednesday 06 March 2002 21:05, you wrote:
> >   2A) math
> >   2B) math/common factor
> >   2C) math/special functions
> >   2D) rational
> >   2E) random
> >   as one math library
> >
> >   Why?  The Boost math library (comprised of all of these portions)
> > extends the vision of the existing math portions of C++98's standard
> > libraries, forming a comprehensive treatment of more & more
> > broadly-useful math topics.
>
> There definitly should be a matrix library as well. But as neither
ublas or
> MTL3 are ready for prime time, I really hope we'll be able to propose
a
> matrix lib the meeting after this one. Such a matrix library is really
really
> necessary for all numerics work.

Agreed.

> Once this is in the C++ standard, I see no
> reason for scientists to stick with Fortran.

Alas, until we can solve some of the low-level issues with
initialization and aliasing, there will still be efficiency arguments
for Fortran.