From: David Greene (greened_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-07 14:46:50
Paul A Bristow wrote:
> I think it would be VERY BAD mistake to fix the idea of SI only in the name,
> when ALL units (including 'zero' units) can be handled.
> "si_unit::length::in" looks plain daft.
> Much as SI units are preferable, sadly, other 'traditional' units are never
> going to go away.
> Lets keep the package as general as possible.
I agree, but unfortunately it is not general enough. See my review
concerning the lack of non-power-of-10 prefixes. I think this
library _should_ be a general units framework but it's not there
yet. Until it gets there or there is a plan to get there, it should
not be called "units."
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk