Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Integer] On Win32, boost::uint_t<65>::fast has 64 bits?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Integer] On Win32, boost::uint_t<65>::fast has 64 bits?
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-02 14:37:51

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost-users_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Integer] On Win32, boost::uint_t<65>::fast 
has 64 bits?

Le 02/05/12 19:11, John Maddock a écrit :
>>> The easiest-to-manipulate, built-in, unsigned integral type with at
>>> least N bits. The parameter should be a positive number. A
>>> compile-time error results if the parameter is larger than the number
>>> of bits in the largest integer type.
>>
>> If I change 65 to 66, the code fails to compile. Can something this
>> simple really be a bug in the library?  Yes, I know, I could check the
>> source code, but I'm being lazy right now.  If this is not a clear case
>> of pilot error, I'll take a look.
>
> Confirmed as a bug, and fixed in Trunk - can't really see how it was ever 
> expected to work really :-(
>
>this was reported already here 
>http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/integer-Bug-in-int-t-lt-65-gt-tt4415449.html
>
>Was the patch I proposed be applied? if yes, what is wrong now?

That was applied and is in 1.49, but a different issue effects uint_t 
specifically.

John.