Re: [boost] [math] Numeric constants docs out of date?

Subject: Re: [boost] [math] Numeric constants docs out of date?
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-09 14:12:22

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:44 AM, John Maddock <boost.regex_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> The docs are quite nice. A couple of suggestions:
>>
>> * In the Introduction's "Why use Boost.Math mathematical constants?"
>> section, consider adding a top level bullet calling out the supported
>> UDT types, rather than mentioning them in the "Accurate" bullet. See
>> attached. UDT support seems to me to be too interesting and important
>> to bury in a description of accuracy.
>
>
> Done.
>
>
>> * Consider adding a historical note somewhere mentioning some of the
>> past math constant attempts and why they were considered insufficient.
>> Then add a FAQ entry "Why is the header done that way?" with an answer
>> that points to the historical note for the problems naive approaches
>> run into.
>
>
> Does this FAQ entry not cover it?
> http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/libs/math/doc/sf_and_dist/html/math_toolkit/constants/FAQ.html#math_toolkit.constants.FAQ.what_happened_to_a_previous_collection_of_constants_proposed_for_boost_

Yes, that's fine. I missed it somehow.

--Beman