Re: [boost] Second iteration of Boost.XInt library uploaded requesting further comments

Subject: Re: [boost] Second iteration of Boost.XInt library uploaded requesting further comments
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-31 14:35:35

AMDG

DE wrote:
> on 31.03.2010 at 22:18
>  Steven Watanabe wrote :
>   
>> It will not.
>>     const size_t        bits_per_digit    = 
>> std::numeric_limits<digit_t>::digits;
>> is equivalent to
>>     static const size_t        bits_per_digit    = 
>> std::numeric_limits<digit_t>::digits;
>>     
>
> i see
> i'm too lazy too consult the standard
> but still i think it's a good idea to define compile time constants as
> enum members
>
> can you clear this question for me once and forever, Steven? is it
> preferable or is it solely a matter of taste?
>   

static const size_t is usually better because it has the
correct type, and so will behave better for overload
resolution.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe