On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 11:14:28AM +0200, Joaqu?n M? L?pez Mu?oz wrote:
Daniel Frey ha escrito:
Toon Knapen wrote:
"enum npos_type { npose = -1 }"
A remark here. AFAICS, if vcapp fails in
enum npos_type { npos = (size_type)-1 }
the way Toon explained, it is the compiler's fault, since an enum must be large enough to accommodate any integral constant. If I'm not wrong, the compiler should make the underlying type of npos_type at least 64 bit.
Yes, the compiler should use a larger type than int for the enum. Can it be persuaded to do so? Maybe it ignores the cast to size_type and uses an int because -1 will fit in an int, in which case maybe this would make it use a bigger type: enum npos_type { npos = -1UL } Just a thought. I've never used vacpp let alone tested this code with it, jon -- "It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." - Jonathan Swift