| -----Original Message----- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Reece Dunn | Sent: 18 June 2003 20:23 | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Math Constants Formal Review -
| Also, using constructs like this is easier for the | programmer. You don't have to search to see if there is a pi/2 constant and find | out what it is called, you simply use: | boost::pi / boost::two or whatever. Previous opinions were in favour of a larger set of constants, and there was considerable discussion about a set of names which were finally agreed to be reasonably consistent. Are you forgetting the very important need that the constants mesh with the Boost interval library? For these I think you need pi_div_3, for example, to provide the upper and lower interval values. (These in turn depend on the floating-point format). What about the complex case, for which an example is provided by Michael Kennistons scheme? Paul _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
