Re: [boost] Re: Re: Dimensional Analysis

From: Phil Richards (news_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-29 09:10:37

On 2005-01-28, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>  The fact that units is required and important shouldn't inhibit the utility
>  of a dimensional analysis library.  Ideally, a units library would depend on
>  a dimensional analysis library. But a dimensional analysis library should be
>  able to stand on its own.

Indeed it does.  I use one every day... we don't care about unit
conversions because we don't do any.  We also don't care about anything
but 4 of the dimensions, so that's all we use.  (We could use more - it
is just an mpl::vector of fractional powers.)

Still, as I said, agreement couldn't be achieved last time round on
pretty much anything, and life is too short to discuss whether angle
should, or shouldn't, be able to be treated as a dimension that
sometimes is, or isn't, dimensionless...

*shudder*

phil
-- 
change name before "@" to "phil" for email