From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-22 01:26:11
Added as ticket #2135, <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2135>,
so I/we don't forget.
On Jul 17, 2008, at 4:02 AM, Daryle Walker wrote:
> I just added some class templates that had declarations like:
> template < intmax_t Value >
> struct whatever;
> Afterwards, I was looking over some of the Boost.Integer headers
> and got curious about the BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T setting used
> within <boost/integer_traits.hpp>. I think we could add two
> typedefs to <boost/cstdint.hpp>
> #if !defined(BOOST_NO_INT64_T) && defined(BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T)
> typedef signed long intmaxc_t;
> typedef unsigned long uintmaxc_t;
> typedef intmax_t intmaxc_t;
> typedef uintmax_t uintmaxc_t;
> Where "intmaxc_t" is the largest signed integer type that is
> suitable for integer constant expressions (like value-based
> template parameters) and "uintmaxc_t" is the unsigned equivalent.
> They should be the same as "intmax_t" and "uintmax_t" on non-broken
> compilers. I'd change my code to use the new types, to be safer.
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk