|
Boost : |
From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-01 15:39:46
I wonder about the following:
#ifdef BOOST_NO_LIMITS
#include <boost/detail/limits.hpp>
#else
#include <limits>
#endif
Maybe we should be checking BOOST_NO_LIMITS_COMPILE_TIME_CONSTANTS instead
of just BOOST_NO_LIMITS? It seems like we could correct for this VC6/STLport
4.0 deficiency... but then we'd have to put our limits in a different
namespace from std (e.g. boost/detail).
---- #ifndef _WIN32 template<> class numeric_limits<wchar_t> : public _Integer_limits<wchar_t, INT_MIN, INT_MAX> {}; #else class numeric_limits<wchar_t> : public _Integer_limits<wchar_t, 0, USHRT_MAX> {}; #endif Is a test for the target OS really the right one to be doing here? ---- Shouldn't we replace BOOST_STL_DECLARE_LIMITS_MEMBER with BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT? -Dave
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk