"Hervé Brönnimann" <hervebronnimann@mac.com> wrote in message news:AA37BF5C-9007-45AC-92DC-4790A699F610@mac.com... I am not following this thread but when I hear of things like boost::numeric::interval<void *>, I have to wonder: what is it you are trying to do? Interval is a *numeric* type, intended for *computation* (i.e., operator+,-,*,/). It is not really intended for integral types, and certainly not for pointer types. If you want an
[...] I think it's more of a usability issue here because "interval" is a very generic term and we all know what it is supposed to do without reading its introduction. If the required changes become too much of an issue then let's forget about it but up to now the only required change would be to substitute a static_cast<>() of a constant integer to a constructor followed by an addition: Problem: .../include/boost/numeric/interval/checking.hpp:62: error: invalid static_cast from type `int' to type `void*' static T empty_lower() { return (std::numeric_limits<T>::has_quiet_NaN ? std::numeric_limits<T>::quiet_NaN() : static_cast<T>(1)); } Solution: static T empty_lower() { return (std::numeric_limits<T>::has_quiet_NaN ? std::numeric_limits<T>::quiet_NaN() : T(0) + 1); } I was hoping using interval<void *> to trace what block of memory the construction of an object is being made on but it can easily be used to unify a block of memory with a pool or memory segment for example. Thanks, -Phil