From: Lars Gullik Bjønnes (larsbj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-04 03:28:46
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
| Robert Ramey wrote:
>>>However, I'm really suspicious of passing wchar_t as unsigned shorts.
>>>wchar_t is 32 bits on some compilers, and gcc is one of them -- which
>>>means you're loosing some data.
>> very good, the whole wchar_t <-> int thing is going to have to be looked
>> at a little more. Oh then there's the case where wchar_t is just a
>> for some int.
| Guess you'll have to figure out what's the widest type which can keep
| wchar_t on a current compiler, using some metaprogramming.
What would be the harm in always using a 32bit type?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk