RE: [boost] Re: Re: physical-quantities

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-09 14:17:51

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Andy Little
| Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 11:52 AM
| To: boost_at_[hidden]
| Subject: [boost] Re: Re: physical-quantities

| Frankly I have got the message long ago that my class
| is not good enough for boost and never will be.
| There is always some thing that can be found that it doesnt do.
| As Paul Bristow pointed out any review of my lib is a foregone conclusion
| AFAIK.

It is NOT that your lib is not GOOD enough, but having waited so long, and with
so many different views, my guess is that Boosters are not going to be rushed
into a judgement. As Reece suggests, there may be a place for two libraries that
meet different needs.  Some people can't tolerate slow compile, some don't value
dimensional analysis. We've already moved on a lot since 'SI units only' were
the limit of our aspirations.

Your proposal has had the considerable benefit in provoking a whole lot of
thought, and anyone who considers it useful can press it into service right now.

| basically I accept the point... but  the next... next step is  ?

I suggest: continue to post your enhancements, if any, into the sandbox and CVS
areas.

Paul

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