Added as ticket #2135, <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2135>, so I/we don't forget. On Jul 17, 2008, at 4:02 AM, Daryle Walker wrote:

I just added some class templates that had declarations like:

//======================================== template < intmax_t Value > struct whatever; //========================================

Afterwards, I was looking over some of the Boost.Integer headers and got curious about the BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T setting used within <boost/integer_traits.hpp>. I think we could add two typedefs to <boost/cstdint.hpp>

//======================================== #if !defined(BOOST_NO_INT64_T) && defined(BOOST_NO_INTEGRAL_INT64_T) typedef signed long intmaxc_t; typedef unsigned long uintmaxc_t; #else typedef intmax_t intmaxc_t; typedef uintmax_t uintmaxc_t; #endif //========================================

Where "intmaxc_t" is the largest signed integer type that is suitable for integer constant expressions (like value-based template parameters) and "uintmaxc_t" is the unsigned equivalent. They should be the same as "intmax_t" and "uintmax_t" on non-broken compilers. I'd change my code to use the new types, to be safer.

-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com