From: Deane Yang (deane_yang_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-15 11:32:01
Hugo Duncan wrote:
> One of the design criteria I would like to see is a clear distinction
> between dimensional analysis and units.
> Dimensional analysis is useful in and of itself, without any concept of
> units. In most numerical simulation work (that I know of) the
> computation assumes self consistent units, rendering the units
> uninteresting. I think that we should have a dimensional analysis
> library with no units.
Is it correct to say that a dimensional analysis library
is functionally the same as a units library that does not allow
conversion from one unit to another (because it assumes each unit
is defining a different dimension)?
Or to put it differently, a units library is a dimensional analysis
library that allows different types to represent the same dimension but
using different units?
If this is right, then I completely agree. The dimensional analysis
library is what I think I described. The units library would add in
the ability to do conversions.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk