boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org on Tuesday, August 26, 2008 2:45 PM:
Christian,
I like your style of critics. Always put a reference to your opinion so it gets more weight. However I do not agree with everything you write.
We don't have to :) But it's good to see the point of other people as well :)
Sure! I'm curious how you changed my code, send it right over please! :) Especially the right-shifting issue caught my interest! Do you have examples where right shifting does not repeat the sign bit? Let me see how you solved it.
please see the sources attached.
as for the right-shifting, I only tried it on intel-based CPUs, so of course here it always works the same. but the C++ is quite clear: right-shifting signed values is implementation dependent, regarding the fill bit on the left, so one shouldn't count on it :)
Akos, I see, you use make_signed and make_unsigned - didn't know those small gems :) Thanks for pointing that out. The workarounds in the oarchive are a bit clumsy but hey, if they root out all of the warnings with little effort. temp = negative ? (typename boost::make_unsigned<T>::type) -((typename boost::make_signed<T>::type)t) : t; Now *that's* a nut :) Quite tricky! But I understand now that both casts are neccessary. (After trying to remove the second one and rethinking ;) Regards, -- Christian Pfligersdorffer Software Engineering http://www.eos.info