Boost logo

Boost :

From: Reece Dunn (msclrhd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-11 23:17:31

>Deane Yang wrote:
>>Complex quanitities are for me clearly beyond the scope of
>>the current unit libraries. Higher dimensional analysis
>>is probably useful, but a lot trickier to implement.
>>1-dimensional analysis serves 90% of the needs.

Dan W. wrote:
>This I take issue with: Complex numbers are used everywhere to describe
>time-changing phenomena, be it voltage, force, current or motion or
>acceleration. And there's nothing that a units library shouldn't be able
>to handle about it. If v = t * u, where all have complex representations,
>boils down to four v = t * u operations using double, say, an addition and
>a subtraction.
>In fact, the units library doesn't even care that a complex multiplication
>is taking place; all it needs to do is decorate the complex result to the
>right type of units, which is the same type as if the operation were

Also, doesn't special relativity make use of 4-vectors/quaternions? I agree
that the dimension/unit/physical quantity information is a decoration to the
data (e.g. inform the compiler that the type has the units kilometers /


Stay in touch with absent friends - get MSN Messenger

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at