From: Terje Slettebø (tslettebo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-05 04:54:46
>From: "Guillaume Melquiond" <gmelquio_at_[hidden]>
Thanks for your comments.
I was aware of that the code could need adjusting, and not at least making
sure it does the right thing. I've already found, via more testing, some
modification that needs to be done (changing "-exponent+1" to
"-exponent+0.5", to round the result to nearest, rather than down, when
converting from double to int). The main point was semantics.
I used the formal review version, as I didn't find it in the boost
directory, although that was because it's now moved to boost/numeric, as you
I'll read up on the new version, and change the code accordingly. I'll also
get back with a proper reply to your comments.
> On Mon, 5 May 2003, [iso-8859-1] Terje Slettebø wrote:
> I have some comments to do about this code. First, the interval library
> don't lie anymore in the boost directory, it is in boost/numeric. And
> similarly, the class is in the namespace boost::numeric. Maybe you are
> using the old version, the one that was in the boost sandbox? This version
> is no longer maintained (and furthermore, it is no more in the sandbox).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk