First I looked in graph/test. Most times int is used there, only once std::size_t: property< edge_index_t, int > Next I looked into graph/example, same picture there. Ok, I read that example and test might contain stuff that would not go into BGL code. So I looked into graph/include/boost/graph: pi@raspberrypi5:~/graph/include/boost/graph $ grep edge_index_t *.hpp | grep size_t directed_graph.hpp: typedef std::size_t edge_index_type; undirected_graph.hpp: typedef std::size_t edge_index_type; pi@raspberrypi5:~/graph/include/boost/graph $ grep edge_index_t *.hpp | grep unsigned directed_graph.hpp: typedef property< edge_index_t, unsigned, edge_property_type > undirected_graph.hpp: typedef property< edge_index_t, unsigned, edge_property_type > pi@raspberrypi5:~/graph/include/boost/graph $ grep edge_index_t *.hpp | grep int graphviz.hpp: property<edge_index_t, int> > pi@raspberrypi5:~/graph/include/boost/graph $ Only graphviz.hpp uses int. But directed and undirected graph use std::size_t as well as unsigned. There are systems when unsigned is smaller than std::size_t: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/size_t 1) Shouldn't at least directed_graph.hpp and undirected_graph.hpp make consistent use of std::size_t then? 2) Shouldn't examples and tests be corrected, as their overly use of int for edge and vertex index types is misleading? Regards, Hermann.