From: David Seidman (david_i_seidman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-16 15:51:45
I figured that platform-dependence issues were a
barrier to 64-bit integer support. I'm not familiar
with Boost's platform philosophy. In general, is a
feature only supported if it works on every platform?
Or does Boost insert platform-specific switches to
implement features whenever possible? 64-bitness
seems to be a good general addition to Boost's integer
library, if it's not a great amount of effort.
--- Daryle Walker <darylew_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The lack of specializations for 0 and 5 are
> deliberate; we have to trap
> requests larger than a "long" somehow. To get a
> "long long," we would have
> to conditionally widen the non-implementation gaps.
> Also, some libraries
> (like CRC) use these types for value-based template
> parameters, and there is
> no guarantee that "long long" can be used that way.
> (You're also assuming the popular mapping 64 bits ->
> "long long" because 32
> bits -> "int" and "long". A compiler could shift
> "long" to a 64-bit type.)
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk