On 7/26/2010 11:51 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
At Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:20:16 +0100, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of David Abrahams Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 3:10 PM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] accurate sum accumulator (kahan)
At Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:59:29 +0100, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
PS As for naming, I'd vote for sum and accurate_sum (to keep backward compatibility).
It's possible I'm completely off the mark here, but I think maybe we want sum and quick_sum.
This would be ideal - but doesn't accumulator already use 'sum' so it would change behaviour of existing programs?
Technically, of course it would, but aren't they getting the wrong answer currently?
I tend to agree with Dave, so long as the kahan sum accumulator is a drop-in replacement for what we already have. Does it Just Work for integral types, too? -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com