Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [random] geometric_distribution backwards compatibility
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-24 01:26:24

On 01/23/2011 04:40 PM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> Over the last year I've been (slowly) updating
> Boost.Random to match the new standard. Unfortunately
> I just hit a problem that I don't have a good solution
> for. In the standard, the geometric_distribution is
> defined as $p(i) = p(1-p)^{i}$, with i >= 0. In the
> current Boost.Random code it is $p(i) = (1-p) p^{i-1}$,
> with i >= 1. The definition in the standard makes
> more sense, but I don't want to introduce a breaking
> change. I can see two options here:
> * Leave the implementation alone and put a big
> warning in the documentation saying that the
> behavior doesn't match the standard.

That's not good. Why would anyone want to use it after the
documentation said that?

> * Since I'm also moving things into namespace
> boost::random, I can use the new definition
> and leave a version with the old behavior in
> namespace boost instead of having a using
> declaration. I'd still have to add a warning
> that boost::geometric_distribution isn't the
> same as boost::random::geometric_distribution.

That's better than the other, but I'd like to hear about the downside of
a breaking change.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at