AMDG On 1/23/2011 4:52 PM, Jeremiah Willcock wrote:
I noticed that discrepancy between Boost.Random and usual definitions of geometric_distribution as well, but forgot to report it; I would prefer to have the standard definition rather than the current one. I support your second option, as long as people don't have both "using namespace boost;" and "using namespace boost::random;" in the same code.
This is unlikely with the current library, since everything useful to users is in namespace boost. Even if it does happen it will produce a compilation error, so it isn't as bad as it could be.
Since you state that you will be moving things around, you are likely to be deprecating the versions in boost::, and so the change in geometric_distribution would fit into the same category.
Okay. Everyone who's spoken up seems to favor this, so I've gone with it. I had to do the same for lognormal_distribution as well. In Christ, Steven Watanabe