[boost] Re: Math constants - updated.

From: Deane Yang (deane_yang_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-18 10:40:09

Lassi A.Tuura wrote:
>> I have nothing against physicists or other C++ programmers who find 
>> templates and boost way too obscure or complex to use and choose to 
>> stick with older techniques that they know how to use effectively. 
>> [...] But what I like about boost a lot is that it adheres relatively 
>> well to a core set of principles and idioms that fit very well with my 
>> programming style. [...] I am against "polluting" boost with code that 
>> compromises these principles, because it would re-introduce 
>> difficulties that boost helps me avoid.
> 
> 
> Do I read you correctly that you actually say templates are an essential 
> part to every design in boost?  I must admit such an approach would 
> never occur to me, I have always thought one picks a technique 
> applicable to the problem, and sometimes it's the 100-year old version 
> that does the best job.  "One hammer doesn't fit all screws" they say :)
> 

I'm sorry for not being clear. Not every part of boost uses templates, 
but templates are used quite extensively in boost. I think boost does 
try to use the best technique applicable to each problem. For the vast 
majority of the problems addressed by boost, templates play a crucial 
role. Before I found boost, I was starting to discover the power of 
templates in my own programming, and I was very happy to find a group of 
real C++ programmers (unlike me) who already understood this better than 
me, had developed libraries I needed, and made them far more bulletproof 
than I am capable of. If boost had done all of this without templates, I 
would have been just as happy, but, as it happens, templates do provide 
a crucial tool.