[std-interval] C++ interval std

[George Corliss]

Lawrence Crowl writes:
>> Well, if we're arguing that passsing-by-value is fundamentally important
>> for speed, and that adding a few more tests is not because speed is less
>> important... ;)
> Pass-by-value is also a correctness issue.
Opps.  I missed that point.

>>> Uninitialized.  The convention in C/C++ is to initialize to zero,
>>> but we agree that is not correct for intervals.  Whole is probably
>>> the best we can do.
>> 
>> I'm not convinced.  Initilization to [0,0] seems nice to me for
>> intervals because of homogeneity reasons with floating-point.
>> I could even imagine that the empty interval would make as much
>> sense as whole.
>> 
>> What makes you think that [0,0] is "not correct", and why 'whole'
>> would be better than 'empty' ?
> 
> Note that on modern systems, initialization to [0,0] is more efficient.
That may be, but I maintain Whole is most faithful to "Thou shalt not lie."

Dr. George F. Corliss
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Marquette University
PO Box 1881 
1515 W. Wisconsin Ave.
Milwaukee WI 53201-1881 USA
414-288-6599; Fax: 288-5579; Dept. 288-6280
Office: Haggerty Engineering 296
George.Corliss at Marquette.edu