Subject: Re: [boost] boost interval arithmetic
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-05 07:51:36
On February 5, 2015 6:53:03 AM EST, Daniel Duffy <dduffy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Interval Arithmetic is well-defined (read Moore). I even had a chapter
> in it in Volume II of my Boost C++ books.
> It's a big pity about these flames and the reactions. It would seem
> that Thijs vd Bergh has a normal question regarding this library? It
> should be possible to give an answer?
> Is it not possible to discuss this without flames?
My recollection of the exchange is that the two principles eventually understood one another and the objection was withdrawn. The one seemed obtuse and the other highly frustrated during the exchange, but there was closure.
As for your concern over flaming, if you read the full exchange, you'll see that the flames did not occur until related attempts to clarify the library's approach fell on deaf ears and began to suggest that the OP understood less than necessary to opine on the issue. Having made that excuse, I agree that it was overly harsh.
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk