
G'day all. John Maddock wrote:
Those of a mathematical inclination, might be interested to note that the only substantive code in the TR1 submission currently under review is some proposed additions to Boost.Math: mainly the inverse complex number trig functions.
Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with this. Do I read it as meaning that [tr.num.sf] is not present in the current submission? Cheers, Andrew Bromage

Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with this. Do I read it as meaning that [tr.num.sf] is not present in the current submission?
Correct. The rumour I hear is that section requires about one man year of work to implement, so it's not likely to be forthcoming from me at least any time soon: unless someone wants to pay for it obviously! John.

I have been exploring the use of Stephen Moshier's Cephes Library in C (which the author has agreed to make available under the Boost license) to provide an implmentation of many of these functions, AND the other missing, and in many cases MUCH more important IMHO, math 'special' functions, mainly requiring the Incomplete beta function, as I proposed http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2004/n1668.pdf but which was rejected as 'too difficult' - for which I suspect means 'too expensive'). Many of the functions in TR1 appear to be present in Cephes and require re-packaging to produce AN implementation in C++ (almost certainly not as good as Dinkumware's but still functional and Standard compliant - since no accuracy is specified). So I am slightly optimistic that we might be able to produce a Boost version that provides BOTH TR1 and the additional proposals for TR2. Paul Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830 +44 7714 330204 mailto: pbristow@hetp.u-net.com www.hetp.u-net.com | -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of John Maddock | Sent: 26 September 2005 11:09 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: Re: [boost] [math] Proposed TR1 additions | | > Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with this. Do I read it as meaning | > that [tr.num.sf] is not present in the current submission? | | Correct. | | The rumour I hear is that section requires about one man year | of work to | implement, so it's not likely to be forthcoming from me at | least any time | soon: unless someone wants to pay for it obviously! | | John. | | _______________________________________________ | Unsubscribe & other changes: | http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost |
participants (3)
-
ajb@spamcop.net
-
John Maddock
-
Paul A Bristow