RE: [boost] Re: Re: Math functions - requirements 'spec'

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-08 14:16:49

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Thorsten Ottosen
| Sent: 07 November 2004 11:08
| To: boost_at_[hidden]
| Subject: [boost] Re: Re: Math functions - requirements 'spec'
| |
| | F*** C comparability!!!  (I gotta go make that bumper 
| sticker    suCks
| | (with the C in a different color))
| | the language should have died a decade ago.

IMO tt should never have been invented !

| | In case anyone else doesn't get it, C++ is simply a better
| | language.  Staying tied to a dinosaur is foolish.

But we already are :-(( 

| It might be worth looking at what  benefits we can get out of 
| a templated version.
| 
| Would it for example, be possible to use the code with a 
| big_floats class?

Don't forget that many functions are simply evaluations of
polynomial functions

- whose coefficients depend on the the float-point (mainly significand) bits
count.

So there exist already coefficients for Cephes 128-bit reals, 
and arbitrary precision 100 decimal digits, for example,
for which the C code might call 

big_double normal_quantile(big_double p); // Quantile of probability p.

but C++ would be able to chose this using a templated version.

Suggest you look at Walter Browns and PJP's TR-1?

Paul

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