Re: [boost] [Review][PQS] Review deadline

From: Janek Kozicki (janek_listy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-14 12:11:26

> Janek Kozicki wrote:
> > Anyone has seen in work a fractional power of unit, different than square root?

John Phillips said:     (by the date of Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:49:39 -0400)

>    Many nuclear reaction rates are modeled in series expansions based on 
> the 1/3 power of the temperature.
>    In general, fitting formulas to measured phenomena will happily use 
> any power you can imagine, if it gets the behavior right.

so the need for rational powers remains? I remember that one of the
reviewers complained that rational powers are "too" much:

Noel Belcourt said:     (by the date of Thu, 8 Jun 2006 00:54:51 -0600)

> 8) Is there an easy way to replace the rational dimensions with 
> integers?  A number of disciplines could probably make do with integers 
> and paying for rational dimensions seems expensive and unnecessary, 
> although it's certainly more general.

Assuming that we want both rational and integer powers - is thare any
way to make it without making the library "too" complicated?

> > Difference between torque and energy happens only during serialization
> > (print N*m, or print J ?), so maybe instead of complicated
> > abstract_quantity_id, there should be just some extra argument/setting
> > that will talk with serialization functions?

I think that this argument still stands? removing abstract_quantity_id
would simplify the design...

-- 
Janek Kozicki                                                         |