Re: [boost] [integer] Recent changes introduced failures on manyplatforms

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-22 04:57:42

Daryle Walker wrote:
> ...But it seems that not every platform that doesn't use the __int64
> types ignores the constant.  I copied that code from some other file
> (I forgot which one.); presumably, that author couldn't find a
> ULONG_MAX equivalent for the __int64 type family.  If there is one,
> or a better alternative that never chokes on non-Windows systems, can
> you tell me?
> 
> I wonder if my compiler is too permissive in ignoring the constant,
> or the others are too strict in interpreting it.  Which compilers are
> affected?  (I'm using Apple's special GCC 4.0.1, Mac OS X 10.4
> PowerPC.)  This is on the trunk, right?  I never intended this to go
> into the current release branch.

#if defined(BOOST_HAS_LONG_LONG)

Then use unsigned long long, and uLL as the suffix.

#elif defined(BOOST_HAS_MS_INT64)

Then use __int64 and the ui64 suffix.

#endif

HTH, John.