[Review Request: Floating Point Utilities]
I wish to withdraw my review request for the floating point utilities library. Please remove the library from the review schedule. The reasons are that: 1. I do not have time to get involved with Boost. (I have started my own software company.) 2. There does not seem to be that much interest in the library. I will leave the library in the vault, under the Boost software license. --Johan Råde
Johan Råde wrote:
I wish to withdraw my review request for the floating point utilities library. Please remove the library from the review schedule.
Please reconsider leaving it in the queue. I'm sure it would be possible to find a mutually agreeable time slot for the review since I know time is an issue here. I think your library is an important one and would like to see it make its way into boost.
Yes time is often very hard to find :(
2. There does not seem to be that much interest in the library.
On the contrary I think there is quite a lot of interest. However it requires a somewhat specialist knowledge base to fully appreciate the issues it addresses and so many (myself included) probably did not feel qualified to offer constructive comments during the earlier discussions. I do recall following the discussions however as I did appreciate the value of the library.
I will leave the library in the vault, under the Boost software license.
Thanks for taking the time to write this library in the first place. I do hope it finds its way into a release at some point, even if not under your care. In the least if you really can't see it through review and know you won't have the time to maintain the library perhaps you could find someone willing to take on that role, perhaps someone involved int he orginal discussions surrounding it. Good luck :) Jamie
Please reconsider leaving it in the queue. I, for one, desperately need something like this. I would be willing to help with development, documentation, testing. The C++ community, in my opinion, needs this library. However I also understand the difficulty in finding spare time. I certainly would not like to see this library die. If you have difficulty continuing perhaps we could arrange a hand over to other developers? Thanks for the work you have published in the vault. Regards, Neil Groves On Jan 2, 2008 10:58 AM, Johan Råde <rade@maths.lth.se> wrote:
Johan Råde wrote:
I wish to withdraw my review request for the floating point utilities library.
Please reconsider. As Neil said, the C++ community really needs this library. The library is rather small, maybe the Boost.Math maintainers could take over the responsibility for it? Best regards, Stephan
No! - please leave it there even if you can't give any (or much) time for it.
Good luck!
2. There does not seem to be that much interest in the library.
There may not *seem* to be much but all people who use floating-point (who doesn't?) will *really need it* - but most of them just don't know that they do ;-)
I will leave the library in the vault, under the Boost software license.
Thanks for all your work so far. Paul --- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow@hetp.u-net.com
The library is essentially finished. It has passed all tests on about 20 different operating system / compiler / processor combinations (thanks to the patient help of Boris Gubenko, John Maddock, Markus Schöpflin and others). The only missing feature, that I can think of, is a mechanism for having the library use the isnan, signbit etc provided by the compiler instead of its own isnan, signbit etc implementations. (The default might be that if a compiler is C99 compatible, then the functions provided by the compiler are used, otherwise the libraries own implementation is used.) There is also an overlap with the Math Tool Kit library; both libraries provide implementations of fpclassify, isnan etc. (The two implementations use completely different approaches.) My plan has been to have the library included in Boost as an addition to Boost.Math rather than as an independent library. However, I'm very busy; the next year will probably decide whether my company becomes a success or a failure. Is anyone interested in taking over the library? If needed, I would be happy to help that person get started. --Johan
Johan Råde wrote:
The very best of luck with that :-) Johan, I must apologise, I've been meaning to volunteer as review manager for this: if accepted the current Boost.Math implementation could be merged with this one (especially as the current Boost.Math implementation already has the pp-logic to use the platform's native implementation where available). IMO the only things stopping this being integrated into Boost.Math as is (given that it doesn't change the interface, only the back end implementation) are: 1) A good eyeball once-over by interested parties, to spot potential issues: since the library uses non-portable casts etc this is quite important IMO. 2) The knowledge to know when to use this implementation, and when/where it might fail. So.... I'd also ask you to keep up the review request - if no showstoppers turn up, then it can just be integrated into Boost.Math more or less as is - hopefully without too much work for yourself or Paul and me. If there are any changes required then we'll have to figure out what to do about them: possibly just restrict the platforms/compilers where your implementation is used. So hopefully, your involvement could be restricted to answering queries about the implementation during the review: is that possible given your current schedule? Best regards, John Maddock.
participants (7)
-
Jamie Allsop -
Johan Råde -
John Maddock -
Neil Groves -
Paul A Bristow -
Robert Ramey -
Stephan Tolksdorf