Re: [boost] two_pi or pi_twice?

From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-23 14:47:33

On Wednesday, October 23, 2002, at 08:45 PM, Guillaume Melquiond wrote:
> More seriously, I prefer using a sort of Polish inverse notation in 
> order
> to have the main term in front of the name. For example, I think it's 
> more
> homogeneous to have
>
>   pi_half
>   pi_twice
>
> rather than
>
>   half_pi
>   two_pi

While I understand the logic behind this, the use of the phrase "two 
pi" is so common in the physics community that I don't see anybody ever 
using a library constant called "pi_twice". I would rather write 2*pi 
which is better readable. Thus, even if there turns out to be a 
consensus for a standard notation starting with the symbol name I would 
strongly urge to keep "two_pi" in addition as a special case.

Matthias