Re: [boost] [safe_numerics] Review

Subject: Re: [boost] [safe_numerics] Review
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-12 05:36:49

On 3/11/17 4:32 PM, Barrett Adair via Boost wrote:
> safe_base & operator--(int){ // post decrement
>     safe_base old_t = *this;
>     --(*this);
>     return old_t;
> }
>
> If I'm reading correctly, this is UB (and likely a segfault).
correct - fixed
>
>
> I do think this library might be much more useful with floating point
> support, if it is eventually added.

indeed.

Want to voluteer?

I'm sure that floating point would end up a lot more complex than first 
meets the eye though.

Robert Ramey