Boost logo

Boost :

From: Michael Glassford (glassfordm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-17 18:09:04

Bjorn.Karlsson_at_[hidden] wrote:

>>From: Michael Glassford [mailto:glassfordm_at_[hidden]]
> Checking for overflow isn't needed in this case, since the underlying type
> is unsigned (and unsigned integer arithmetic does not overflow [per
> §]).

Thanks! Perhaps that's why the reference to this problem, which I
vaguely (and perhaps incorrectly) remember being in an early version of
the source for the barrier class, was removed.

> Bjorn
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at