Re: [Boost-users] [math][tools][units] generic libraries not genericenough

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [math][tools][units] generic libraries not genericenough
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-26 13:34:32

on Fri Aug 26 2011, alfC <alfredo.correa-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

>> "tools" including these root finding algorithms, so officially, this 
>> function is an implementation of Boost.Math
>>
> this is the best argument. Sorry I picked on your library, it was mainly an 
> statement, on a clean case, that many boost libraries are really 
> half-generic while they pretend to be generic. 

I think this is a misunderstanding of the term "generic library."
Genericity is never an absolute, and the level of generality is supposed
to be driven by real, non-generic, use cases.  If the designers didn't
have before them a units-based use case, they couldn't be expected to
design for it.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com