Dear all,
I received an email message from a member
of the list questioning whether I could change
some points in the library in order to
make it more conforming with the standard.
The simple answer is: yes, I will accept
suggestions and change the library in
points in which do not alter its essence.
For instance, I can provide two versions
of many functions, a slightly slower
confirming to the standard and a
"raw" one, which does things different
from the standard in some cases.
In all fairness, there cases in which
I am not sure that the "faster" version
will be actually any faster than the the
standard one. And I did consider this in the past.
A point in which I do not plan to change
the library is in its support for decorations,
simply because I don't like the idea.
However, I respect people who do like
decorations and there is a "SIMPLE WAY"
around this. I would be glad to help
programmers with enough patience to try it.
In C++, it would be "JUST A QUESTION OF.."
writing a class
template <Interval I>
class DecInterval
{
I interval
Dec decoration.
};
This class could actually work with
ANY Interval class I, like boost's
for instance, and simplify the work
of people trying to write libraries
which would be fully compliant with
the standard.
People used to writing soffware are
well aware that "SIMPLE WAY"s,
"JUST A QUESTION OF.. " and "ANY.."
can easily become a nightmare,
but if there are any volunteers willing
to try this I could help with advice,
ideas. and the code of the Moore
library. I just don't have the time
to do the coding.
Any candidates?
regards,
walter.