Re: [boost] Interest in dimension/unit-checking library?

From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-13 05:28:18

"Matt Calabrese" <rivorus_at_[hidden]> wrote

> My argument is that what you call numeric types aren't always simply
> numeric types. Division of similar quantities result in a quantity with an
> empty classification but which has unique units, such as with radians.
> Completely separately, I do see an orthogonal problem. How should we handle
> multiplication of two quantities of empty classification. For instance,
> degrees * degrees should result in degrees^2, just like meters * meters
> results in meters^2. This concept does make sense, however, squaring a
> quantity which has an empty classification would result in another quantity
> having an empty classification (0^2 equals 0). So, we run into the odd case
> that degrees and degrees^2 have the same classification.

FWIW  angle * angle  is known as a 'solid angle". steradian is a solid angle
unit.

regards
Andy Little