Re:C++17 and other future highlights of C++
by humanrebar on Thursday March 10, 2016 @05:13PM
(#11262894)
> ...how many C++ users regularly need the Riemann zeta function or a modified Bessel function of the second kind?
I've wondered the same thing myself. They're probably easier to standardize since the specification for that behavior is already done by mathematicians. And the implementation is generally re-entrant so the possibility of show-stopper design bugs is minimal.
Getting concepts wrong, in contrast, has a much larger downside.
Not saying special maths should be standardized. Just attempting to describe the phenomenon.
I've wondered the same thing myself. They're probably easier to standardize since the specification for that behavior is already done by mathematicians. And the implementation is generally re-entrant so the possibility of show-stopper design bugs is minimal.
Getting concepts wrong, in contrast, has a much larger downside.
Not saying special maths should be standardized. Just attempting to describe the phenomenon.