From: Hubert Holin (Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-15 09:01:42
Somewhere in the E.U., le 15/06/2004
In article <20040602235400.88511.qmail_at_[hidden]>,
Tom Brinkman <reportbase_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> What is the current status of all Boost mathmatical,
> statistical and econometric libraries currently in
I am still desperately trying to find time to work on special
functions. As things look now, the first time slot I have available for
this is the last week of July. I *will* work on them, however.
> The collection of boost math libraries that are
> currently included in the library are world-class and
> provide a wonderful foundation to build-upon.
> However, many areas of advanced statistical and
> mathmatical inference are not currently being
> addressed by any of the boost libraries.
> Is there currently a way for those boost developers
> with a background in mathmatics to coordinate their
> efforts. If not, why not? Lets get such a discussion
The main problem is time (see above). Then there are genuine
field-specific difficulties, as evidenced by the math constants
> A continued and regular dialog of mathmatics as it
> relates to boost library development would be of great
> use, primaryily to avoid overaping our efforts.
> If your a mathmetician and agree with me that boost is
> a great foundation to build-upon, let the group/me
> Points for Discussion:
> 1) We should keep a seperate list of boost::math
> libraries that are currently under development and
> provide a forum for advanced discussions. How can we
> do this?
The usual procedure for all Boost libraries work very well here as
well. Several proposals are floated on this list. Usually, when we get
to the nitty-gritty, personal E-mails are best, and then the review
process is by far the best honing tool before release. Then it's user
feedback, and the next iteration.
> 2) We need a way to attract the best mathmaticians in
> the world. How can we make the boost libraries an even
> more attractive development platform for the
Develop and they will come :-) .
> 3) We should create a list of mathmatical algorithims
> and libraries that are needed.
These sporadically appear here. Perhaps a more permanent (if of
varying content) document in the Boost distribution would be beneficial?
> 4) We need some very basic boost specific
> math-tutorials for our future mathemiticans and
> potential library writers.
Everybody is welcome to contribute. Even though I have (still) not
had the time to look at this, perhaps the wiki could be levered?
> 5) We need to advertise to the development community
> about how strong of a foundation boost is for
> mathmatical library development.
> In short, lets tell the world that this is the
> premiere place for advanced mathmatical library
> development, as I believe that it could be.
> Tom Brinkman
There *are* issues with math development in C++. Some deal with
efficiency, and are pointed out in other components of this thread.
Others that apparently have not been, requires language support. For
instance default template parameters are sadly limited in kind (has this
been fixed while I was in Limbo?). Another one (which evades me at the
moment, sorry, really need some vacation) involves template functions
(but not classes) and either default parameters or overloading.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk