| -----Original Message----- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daniel Frey | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 4:51 PM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: [boost] Re: Math Constants Formal Review | | | > [3] Physics-based constants should be definable within the constants | > framework and should be set to their current accuracy (possibly making | > use of intervals). | | Maybe we could provide some defaults that can be overwritten by the | user? Something like: | | --- header physics_constant_values.hpp | | template< typename T > struct g_default_value; | template<> struct g_default_value< double > | { double operator()() const { return 9.81; }; | | template< typename T > g_value : g_default_value< T > {}; | | --- header physics_constants.hpp | | #include <boost/physics_constant_values.hpp> | struct g_t : constant< g_t, g_value > {} g; | | --- user adds to his project-header physics_constants.h: | | #include <boost/physics_constant_values.hpp> | template<> struct g_value< double > | { double operator()() const { 9.81424242424; } }; // Ha, I know better! | #include <boost/physics_constants.hpp>
No objections to this but I really would like to follow the conclusion of the previous review that we should concentrate on math constants FIRST - getting agreement on them seems to be plenty difficult enough! Paul _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
