Subject: Re: [boost] sorting library proposal (Was: Review Wizard Status Report for June 2009)o
From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-03 10:42:32
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Edouard A. <edouard_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> I'm questioning the degree of assurance required for a new algorithm
>> to be unleashed on the unsuspecting masses.
>
> Exactly the point I was trying to make.
So we agree violently then.
;-)
> To be more precise the novelty of an algorithm shouldn't be held against
> it.
If you define "reasonable assurance" to exclude any algorithm that has
not been published in a reputable journal, with at least 2 citations,
is it still novel?
;-)
Just kidding, WRT the novelty bit.
> What matters is that a reasonable degree of assurance regarding correctness
> and performance can be given. This concerns the library as a whole, not
> just whatever algorithm(s) it may use.
So how do we define "reasonable degree of assurance"?
Jon