RE: [boost] Statistics code example (this time with code)

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-08 12:18:50

Thanks. This indeed looks improved in several ways.

Norm function is better idea - might also be user defined version for user
defined type.

 I may get some time to try some other refinements and experiments. (Would
several zeros be better casted to type T in case T is a user defined type (an
interval type perhaps?)?)

Testing on NIST test data (tricky) is also a must.  We mustn't follow Excel -
and get the wrong answer!

Paul

Paul A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]   Mobile [phone]
Mobile mailto:pabristow_at_[hidden]
mailto:pbristow_at_[hidden]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Neal D. Becker
> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 1:22 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Statistics code example (this time with code)
>
>
> On Monday 07 April 2003 08:06 am, Neal D. Becker wrote:
> > I made some improvments to the previous code.  The old code used the "abs"
> > function, which might or might not be defined for all data types we want to
> > support.  Now it uses our own "Norm" function.
> >
> > Also the "count" is cast to "value_type" to avoid warnings.
> >
> > Sorry, I haven't had time to incorporate other suggestions posted here.
> > Feel free to modify.
>
> Sorry, forgot the attachment:
>