Re: [Boost-users] [units] conversion_factor in the two directions

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [units] conversion_factor in the two directions
From: alfC (alfredo.correa_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-28 00:58:40

> that worked right away. What would be the drawback of using
> DEFAULT_CONVERSION macro? loss of precision perhaps?

actually, the question is more profound, from the design of the
library it seems that you were very careful not to make any
transformation automatically because loss of precision.
If that is the case I would like to follow your design principle. On
the other hand, even if I want to work in atomic units (motivated by
the order of magnitudes of the quantities) it is inevitable to output
some of the results in SI. The question is does it make sense to have
this transformation from Hartree to Joule with such an huge exponent.

Following your design, would it be better to have a conversion from
Hartree to some scaled unit of Joule (femtoJoule) instead, so all the
machine number have small exponents?

Alfredo