Subject: Re: [boost] GSOC 2013
From: Dmitriy Gorbel (dmitriycpp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-24 17:59:29
Michael, thanks for the links.
As for me, this page also has interesting info(and this page
give me idea to provide math functions).
Vicente Botet wrote
> As I said there are several notations and there is no real one that
> would make happy everyone. So I think that the library should take in
> account this point and provide some aliases (c++11)/type traits(c++98)
> for the most common notations.
> Choosing the default notation is critical and having a consensus on it
> would be difficult. Do you think that it is worth proposing several
> default notations and request the boost community to choose the default
Yes, of course, boost community should choose the default notation.
What is the best way to provide several notations?
That is less important issue, but I have question about the file structure.
In the prototype all code in one file. But I think file structure may look
fixed_point.hpp - top level header
I do not insist, but I think segregation better than one file,
and want to know your opinion.
P.S. The proposal.
I think this is final version, or close to final.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/GSOC-2013-tp4645089p4646027.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk