From: Janek Kozicki (janek_listy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-17 19:29:20
Andy Little said: (by the date of Sat, 17 Jun 2006 14:25:50 +0100)
> I have been following the geometry debate with interest. It probably doesnt need
> to be stated that geometry on numeric types is a sophisticated field. Geometry
> on strongly typed quantities in C++ is I think a relatively unexplored field.
we had a discussion about this few months ago, lenghty thread named
"Interest in geometry library". But then it drifted towards some other
more "geometrical" things like circles, ellipses, or defining a
namespace with name 'euclidean' so that inside will be stored all
functions related to euclidean space, and then other namespaces for
other spaces. And it all got lost, because it simply grew too big.
Therefore currently I would prefer to avoid name 'geometry' because we
are in fact talking about just linear algebra (that's what vectors and
-- Janek Kozicki |
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk