From: Hubert Holin (Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-16 07:29:24
Somewhere in the E.U., le 16/06/2004
In article <camtfe$9ja$1_at_[hidden]>,
"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Hubert Holin" <Hubert.Holin_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> | What about better expressivity? If you need complex numbers, you
> | want to treat them as full-blown critters, and (most frequently, if not
> | always) not as simply a couple of reals.
> Complex numbers are a funny bunch to implement. We actually don't want too
> encapsulation; in fact you can find several proposals on open-std that seek
> to remove much of the
> encapsultion of the complex class in C++.
What I understood is that people wanted the best of both worlds
(sometimes it's an object and sometimes it's just an array), and in this
case it could actually happen! What was called for, IIRC, is a guaranty
about layout, for which language support was needed. I unfortunately do
not know the current situation, but would most like to.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk