I suppose it is. I like the benefit of the code being readable, and if units helps to check the safety at compile time, so much better. Otherwise it's left to developer-discipline, which I can tell you on the team I'm working with now, there's a lack of that. On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Robert Jones wrote:

Yes, to all your questions, so isn't 'conversion' just a simple calculation?

- Rob.

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Michael Powell wrote:

...

Hello,

I am looking for a Coulombs to mAh (milliamp-hours) converter. It's conversion is a ratio I think: 1000 / 3600 (A -> mA, seconds -> hours).

Haven't checked yet, but does SI include Coulombs? Or for that matter Amperes, where Coulomb = A s, I think.

Thank ye.

Regards,

Michael Powell _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

-- ACCU - Professionalism in programming - http://www.accu.org

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

In the sense I pick my battles, yes. I am operating as the architect on the job, so the buck stops with me on that front. I get your point, though, where cross-disciplinary boundaries go. There's a difference though: auto value = 10*coulombs; auto mah_value = value*1000/3600; What the unit for mah_value? Presumably the dimension is still electrical_charge? But what is the unit? How to express that in the units vocabulary? On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Robert Jones wrote:

Ah, yes, that... that's a much bigger problem. Maybe this isn't the issue on which to nail your colors to the mast.

Presumably then, what you really need is a framework for ensuring dimensional integrity too? That's much more fun!

- Rob.

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users