Re: [boost] Demand for Boost libraries - was Math tools polynomial enhancements

Subject: Re: [boost] Demand for Boost libraries - was Math tools polynomial enhancements
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-11-02 04:33:55

On November 2, 2015 12:30:16 AM EST, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 10/31/2015 12:10 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> >
> > This goes double for the C++ committee. How is it that years of
> effort
> > and discussion and development can be invested in "Concepts" while
> > getting Boost authors to include "concepts" in their documentation
> and
> > boost concept checking in their code is like pulling teeth.
> 
> Perhaps because "concepts" are not part of C++ and unless concepts 
> become codified Boost authors have nothing to work with in adding 
> "concepts" to their library.

Concepts are about documenting the operations required of a parameterizing type combined with semantics. BCCL goes a long way towards checking the former, while names and documentation can manage the latter. Concepts in the language will be nicer, of course.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)