Re: [boost] [ongoing review of binary_int] reviewers for small utility wanted

From: Alexander Nasonov (alnsn-boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-21 07:14:01

Paul Mensonides <pmenso57 <at> comcast.net> writes:

> It is possible, but requires quite a few more macros to implement
> (approximately double).  How about:
> 
> BOOST_BINARY_LITERAL(...)
> BOOST_BINARY_LITERAL_U(...)
> BOOST_BINARY_LITERAL_L(...)
> BOOST_BINARY_LITERAL_UL(...)
> 
> (etcetera, if we need/want long long support)

It looks nice.

> All of these are easy to implement.  BTW, is there any reason why we
> couldn't go with just 'BOOST_BINARY'?

This one is even better.

--
Alexander Nasonov