Re: [boost] Re: Numerical Integration - continued

From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-22 11:14:34

At Tuesday 2002/10/22 08:31, Martin Weiser <weiser_at_[hidden]> wrote:
[deleted]

>Huh? What's the integral over (3.5,6.78,5.89,2.0) then? I figure you mean
>summation instead of integration in this case, but I think this task is
>sufficiently different from integration to justify an interface of its
>own.

This is exactly the kind of integration used in flight simulators where the 
'numbers' are coming from external inputs (e.g. the pilot).  Summation 
would be equivalent to "rectangular integration".  There are other models 
which may work better.  Though in the simulations we used to run, we 
_needed_ a signature something like:

double integrate_step<method>(double next_delta_x, double next_delta_t);

Where often, delta_t would be a constant over the "run".  Other times, it 
varied.

>Yours
>Martin
>
>--
>Dr. Martin Weiser            Zuse Institute Berlin
>weiser_at_[hidden]                Scientific Computing
>http://www.zib.de/weiser     Numerical Analysis and Modelling
>
>_______________________________________________
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A
PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"