From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-29 19:40:21
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Deane Yang wrote:
>> Andy Little wrote:
>>>> Ben appears to have implemented a core library that I believe has a much
>>>> broader range of applications than a physical dimensions library. I have
>>>> reason to believe that somewhere inside your library, you have the same
>>>> thing implemented.
>>> That is not now or for the foreeable future a goal of Quan.
>> This sounds reasonable to me. It appears to me that there are two
>> distinct libraries with two distinct sets of applications that we've all
>> been discussing as if they were the same thing. I think Ben, Jeff, and I
>> want the "no pre-defined dimensions" one, while yours is a physical
>> dimensions library.
> I agree...seems like there's room for both. User defined units is a long and
> old debate. Some of us aren't going to give up on it :-)
I don't agree. As I understand it Ben Strassers Boost. Units library is going
to provide all the functionality in Quan and more, in which case there is no
room for both. AFAICS Bens library is going be more generic, encompassing all
the current functionality in Quan,so it looks like there is no point in
resubmitting Quan for another review, as it would soon be superceded by
Boost.Units anyway. I look forward to seeing the Boost Units library proposal
soon and I can then retire Quan and become just a happy Boost. Units user.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk