RE: [boost] Re: I/O operators for Interval library

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-02 10:39:45

Sorry I have been away on holiday and couldn't comment sooner.

This whole problem is rather complicated and I accept Guillaume's view that the
interval library IO may best be left minimal or non-existent (though some
examples may save users, especially novice users, some time in devising
something to suit themselves. Terje's is a useful example, like Guillaume's -
which should be documented as an example, not removed).

I have devised an uncertain scheme based on code by Evan Manning
(manning_at_[hidden])
Evan Marshal Manning C/C++ Users Journal, March 1996 page 29 to 38.
original downloaded from ftp://beowulf.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/manning
A fuller collection of even fancier classes also given in UReal.h.

Standard deviation & its uncertainty added Paul A Bristow 31 Mar 98 to Jun 03.

but found it rather messy to implement (especially input).  It might be cleaner
inheriting from the interval library (though I am not sure).

Quite how to bring this, and the quantity library together, is a major task, but
I remain convinced it is an important objective.

Now that the major compiler incompatibility and in completeness problems appear
to be solved, I will look at my code again.

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 Terje Slettebø
| Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 11:17 PM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: Re: [boost] Re: I/O operators for Interval library
|
|
| >From: "Guillaume Melquiond" <gmelquio_at_[hidden]>
|
| > On Mon, 5 May 2003, [iso-8859-1] Terje Slettebø wrote:
| >
| > > >From: "Guillaume Melquiond" <gmelquio_at_[hidden]>
| > >
| > > The proposed output operator may be more general-approach, though, for
| the
| > > cases where intervals are used to specify precision, so it might be
| useful
| > > to provide it in some way, rather than each user having to make it.
| >
| > Unfortunately, is there really a version of the operators that could be
| > useful to more than a few users?
|
| I guess it depends. As mentions, Paul A. Bristow brought up the issue of
| using the Interval library with a quantity library. Unless the values are
| represented in a way that's easy to understand, such as this, it may be hard
| to use it with it. If he's reading this, maybe he could comment?
|