From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-05 09:29:38
Beman Dawes wrote:
> "Thomas Witt" <witt_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>In this case the fact that it is a bitmask type seems to be kind of
>>misleading. Isn't the whole point of a bitmask type to be able to have
>>multiple flags set at once?
> Multiple flags are or'ed together for tests:
> if ( (status(p) & (directory_flag|file_flag)) != 0 ) ...
> Isn't the usual way of the standard is to describe that as a "bitmask
Sorry if my post sounded offending, it wasn't meant that way. That being
said it was clueless anyway. I'll search for a stone to hide under.
-- Thomas Witt witt_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk