From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-05 12:28:15
John Maddock wrote:
> Ah yes, forgot that. My gut feeling is that Boost.Math should concentrate
> on the um... math: provide a nice simple implementation that's reasonably
> efficient too. And libraries like Boost.Units can overload it for
> dimentioned-quantities, and use the Boost.Math version for the internal
> calculation. Does this make sense?
Unfortunately, calls like pow<1>(x) will not use ADL. So it becomes
write generic functions.
> I guess the question is can we evaluate half-powers more efficiently than
> just using pow? Maybe, but it's not so obvious to me as it is for smallish
> integer powers.
Not that I know of. I'm more interested in polymorphism than performance.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk