Boost logo

Boost :

From: Ken Hagan (K.Hagan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-16 03:31:00

Jaap Suter wrote:
> As for implementing these types in terms of a geometric algebra? It
> depends. [...] if you have a clifford library in your project already
> anyway, you might as well use it for complex numbers, quaternions,
> etcetera. Otherwise, using clifford to provide these basic components
> is probably overkill.

Overkill for who? You only write the library once. The compiler has
more work to do, but that may be affordable. The run-time cost may
well be zero.

As far as the client programmer is concerned, the major cost is in
writing bridges and forwarding functions whenever they wish to use
third party std::complex libraries in their clifford-using project.
I wondered whether we can reduce that cost to zero, by telling the
compiler that std::complex *is* a 2D spinor.

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