From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-25 05:07:48
"Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote:
>> Then there's TR1, which is rather under-specified in this area, so
>> double :-(
>> To be honest I'm not sure what we should do here: in C++ we really
>> do want these types to be unsigned!!!
> Is this something that could be run through comp.lang.c++.moderated?
> Or is it so that you cannot expect to get a specific type out of
> UINT8_C? (meaning that the test really is wrong, and that it is doing
> something that is not guaranteed.)
Unfortunately, I think there is a problem with our test, I've now found
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/dr_209.htm which makes it
clear that the behaviour was changed in the C99 TC :-(
So I'll change the test to stop testing the unsigned requirements for types
smaller than int.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk