Re: [glas] using (boost)range or STL style interface [was: dense and sparse vectors]
From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-07 15:33:16
David Abrahams wrote:
>>But again, don't get me wrong: I see the value of a range or
>>cursor-and-property-map style interface, I'm just saying that IMO we
>>need 'scientific' proof of the best approach before deciding.
> I don't know what kind of 'scientific proof' you are expecting to see.
> Do you want to get 100 numerical programmers in a room and test which
> approach they can use more easily?
Of course on usability it's hard to get scientific proof. What I
actually meant was to benchmark both approaches before deciding.
But benchmarking them in detail against each other is a hugh undertaking
of course. So 'scientific proof' should be interpreted here as 'very
well educated guess'.
And I am sure you have very good reasons to go with cursors and property
maps. But I think it's a good thing to have some 'paper' that describes
the advantages/disadvantages in detail that can be consulted by all users.