Re: Boost.Threads - Open Questions from the Review

From: William Kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-17 08:59:45

From: "Scott McCaskill" <scott_at_[hidden]>
>>--- In boost_at_y..., Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_g...> wrote:
>> >  - xtime.hpp uses "boost/stdint.h", which is deprecated
>> >and fails with como on my Linux box.  Use "boost/cstdint.hpp"
>> >instead (need to fix uintXX_t usage in the code as well).
>>
>>I don't understand the part in parens above.  xtime.hpp uses int_fastXX_t
>>types but not uintXX_t types, and I don't know of anything in the usage 
>>that
?> needs fixed.
>>
>
>Not sure if this is what the OP was talking about, but gcc produces
>signed/unsigned warnings because xtime::sec and xtime::nsec are >signed.  
>Is
>there any reason why they should not be unsigned?  I changed these 
> >variables
>to be unsigned types in my local copy to eliminate the warnings.

Yes, there's a reason for them being signed.  It allows you to have dates 
prior to the epoch.  Where do signed/unsigned warnings occur?  My compiler, 
even at level 4, doesn't indicate any such problems.

Bill Kempf

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp