From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-21 07:24:48
On Aug 20, 2006, at 8:36 PM, Andy Little wrote:
> "Matthias Troyer" <troyer_at_[hidden]> wrote
>> OK, this sounds reasonable enough, except that I'm still confused
>> what exactly an anonymous quantity is.
> I realise I didnt answer this question.
> In the calculation:
> force * distance;
> The programmer might be dealing with a force acting at a moment, or
> the energy
> required to move an object.
> There is no way to tell from the calculation which. (One could
> apply some
> angular tag to torque, but after experimenting with this I found it
> rather vague
> and fussy).
> Therefore, as there is no way to tell which quantity is intended I
> don't try, so
> the result is an anonymous quantity.
> One could apply various rules (for instance length * length -->
> area), but as I
> can't apply a rule easily to the above case, I opted to apply the
> same rule to
> every case of dimensionful multiplication and division, which was
> to return an
> anonymous quantity and leave it to the programmer to decide which
> quantity they
> were dealing with.
As far as I understand, the named quantities just use special symbols
then? Actually Nm is a valid unit for both energy and torque, but you
sometimes want it printed as J and sometimes as Nm, and you use named
quantities to force this? Is this correct?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk