Karsten Ahnert wrote:
Nevertheless, I think some simple ODE solvers would fit into Boost,
Why do you think that some "simple" ODE solvers would fit into Boost, but more "complicated" real world ODE solvers would not? I always thought that Boost solves real world problems, and hence doesn't exclude "complicated" things in case they are really required.
libs for numerical root finding and optimization are also part of it, at least experimentally.
Can you be more concrete? Which libraries are you talking about here?
Many libraries for solving ODEs exist in the C/C++ world, but many of them lack the use of the standard interfaces and containers. This is really a drawback to languages like Fortran or Python and odeint is one attempt for easy to use and container-independent ode solver.
I don't think that "container" is an appropriate abstraction in the domain of ode solvers. Don't you think that a vector space where you can do scalar multiplication and addition would be a more appropriate abstraction? Based on what I have seen from odeint, I would vote against inclusion into Boost. And I would probably also vote against inclusion into Boost of a fully polished simple ODE solvers library that provides just explicit RK solvers with adaptive stepsize control. Regards, Thomas