Re: [boost] math/statistics policy-interface feedback requested.

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-12 12:09:36

Paul A Bristow wrote:
>> Following the successful review of the math-toolkit of special
>> functions and
>> statistical distributions the main feature request was for a
>> better way of
>> customising the library: both for choosing between precision vs speed
>> tradeoffs, and for determining how errors are best handled.  I've
>> been experimenting with various policy-based interfaced based on
>> Boost.Parameter,
>> and I think I now have something useable, so I'd like to know
>> what people
>> think:
>
> This all looks *very*  (even excessively!) cool, and has real
> practical value.
>
> But it is more complicated  - though most people just use the default
> defaults ;-)
>
> I see the error messages as being *really* important, so some other
> mechanism than BOOST_CURRENT_FUNCTION must be devised to avoid the
> obfuscating pages added by MPL.  More MPL ;-)

Yep, we could just specify the function name manually "boost::math::tgamma" 
etc, I guess we could maybe even use Boost.Format to insert the template 
type - I think all the error handlers get passed that type separately 
anyway - I'll have to check that.

> Finally, I wonder what the effect on the C++ ISO Standards process
> will be?  Will WG21 take fright? Do we care?

Not at present :-)

> PS It also has a cost of some hacking hours ;-)

I know :-(

John.