From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-10 14:03:07
At 02:27 PM 3/10/2001 +0100, Thomas Maeder wrote:
>I think I've found an error on
>Shouldn't fast in uint_t be typedefed from uint_fast_t (vs. int_fast_t)?
It is actually correct although it certainly looks wrong at first glance.
The template int_fast_t<> works correctly for unsigned types, but that
isn't obvious from the name.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk