From: Jens Maurer (Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-25 14:34:47
David Abrahams wrote:
> > So it looks like boost should prepare for long long, but not expect it to
> > work just yet, even in compilers apparently supporting long long.
> Yep. An interesting phenomenon with MSVC is that numeric_limits<> is not
> specialized for __int64... and it can't be, at least if you want
> compile-time constants, because the enums you must use cannot hold the
> proper values of min and max. What fun!
> I'm not sure whether it's better to provide a numeric_limits<> for long long
> without compile-time constants, or just keep the status quo.
Keep the status quo. I don't think we currently use numeric_limits<>
members outside of template instantiations, so we don't really need it.
Leaving it out makes failure more obvious and passes the issue back to
the MSVC standard library maintainers.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk