[boost] Re: Stdint header?

From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-08-04 01:26:00

Beman Dawes wrote:
> 
> At 07:28 PM 8/3/99 +0100, Kevlin Henney wrote:
> 
> >Beman Dawes wrote:
> >While the template approach seems conceptually more elegant, I find
> >the resulting user code unbearably ugly.  The typedef and constant
> >approach is basically stdint.h without the macros, a nice
> advantange.
> >
> >   True, but it might be argued that the template approach is in
> many ways
> >   consistent w/ the way types are found from templates in the
> standard
> >   library.
> >
> >Kevlin, what did your template approach look like?
> >
> >     int_exact<32>::type
> >     int_least<32>::type
> 
> That strikes me as better than having a single type with
> exact/least/fast/etc types embedded.  Not sure exactly why, but my
> gut feeling is it would extend better.

I am sure why a single type with typedef for (least or fast) 

-- 
Valentin Bonnard