From: Zach Laine (whatwasthataddress_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-29 14:50:22
On 3/29/07, Steven Watanabe <steven_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Matthias Schabel <boost <at> schabel-family.org> writes:
> > >> Mathias, for this reason quantity_cast should be
> > >>
> > >> quantity_cast<quantity<SI::force> >(q)
> > >>
> > >> Agreed?
> > I'm actually wondering if we can completely eliminate quantity_cast -
> > with the new quantity_reinterpret_cast and the new conversions
> > including value type, it seems like it is redundant. If so, I'd
> > rather just get rid of it...
I think it's important to be able to differentiate between conversions
that are typesafe (quantity_cast) and those that are not
> I actually prefer to use quantity_cast instead of
> quantity_reinterpret_cast. After all, the behavior
> of reinterpret_cast is unspecified except that
> certain conversions are reversible, while
> quantity_reinterpret_cast is always well-defined.
While quantity_reinterpret_cast may not be perfectly analogous to
reinterpret_cast, it represents the reinterpretation of a raw number
as being of a different type, and so I think it's a pretty good name.
Just as importantly, I can't think of anything better. Do you have
any other ideas? quantity_unsafe_cast? quantity_arbitrary_cast? :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk