Re: [boost] More type_traits confusion

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-21 21:19:02

David Abrahams wrote on 1/21/2001 9:13 PM
>> Note that is_signed<char>::value is both well formed and well-defined,
>> though its result will vary with implementations.
>
>I think you should look again. For CW and GCC, is_signed<char>::value
>reports false, even though chars are signed.

I can't speak for gcc, but I'm not duplicating your results for cw.  My 
tests are showing that cw reports true for is_signed<char>::value unless 
"Use Unsigned Chars" is checked in the language prefs panel, in which 
case it reports false (both PPC and Windows).

-Howard