Subject: Re: [boost] [geometry] robustness approaches
From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando.cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-20 08:28:29
> I'm sure GMP and mfpr are good.
> But the license issue should be fully resolved before you/we get too far
> down the line?
IIRC there has never been a precedent of a Boost library practically requiring
(to be actually useful) an external non-boost library, so this deserves its own
While in the case of GTL, it is thechnically up to the user to pick up "their
own" multipresicion number types, they actually can't do that without an
external non-boost library since such number types do not exists in the SCL.
So I think you are right in that, without that discussion, the formnal review of
GTL will quickly wind up in a silly licensing war.
Paul, can you start a new thread on the topic?
-- Fernando Cacciola SciSoft Consulting, Founder http://www.scisoft-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk