Re: [boost] [statistics] design/interface reprise

From: Deane Yang (deane_yang_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-01 10:23:49

John Maddock wrote:
> Daniel Egloff wrote:
>> What's about
>>
>> complemented(cdf)(dist, x);
>> cdf(complemented)(dist, x);
>> cdf<complemented>(dist, x);
>>
>>
> Of those I would prefer (2), or else:
> 
> // complemented cdf:
> cdf(complemented(dist, x));
> 
> // quantile from complement of probabilty:
> quantile(complemented(dist, q));
> > 
> I'm also tempted to suggest that "complemented" is spelled "complement".
> 
> I'd be interested to know what other think though.

I was happy with cdf_c, but this syntax looks good to me, too. I also 
prefer "complement" over "complemented".

> 
> As for the multivariate case, no we haven't thought about it (there's more 
> than enough to do at present in the univariate case), I suspect we would 
> have to fall back on "not all operations are supported on all 
> distributions", which would be not unreasonable in that case.  A compiler 
> error in other words.
> 

I definitely recommend sticking to univariate distributions for now. 
Multivariate ones open up too many questions.