[utility] Pull request: Use an unsigned type as an intermediate result instead of left shifting a negative integral constant
https://github.com/boostorg/utility/pull/4 No maintainer listed in maintainers.txt so cross posting this one. Ben
On Friday, April 04, 2014 12:12 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
Ping
On Friday, April 11, 2014 01:08 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 04, 2014 12:12 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
Ping
Nobody?
Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 11, 2014 01:08 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 04, 2014 12:12 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
Ping
Nobody?
+1. I have no ability to commit this, but the change looks reasonable. Unfortunately, from the history [1] it looks like those who have done most with this file have been relatively quiet recently. Hopefully you'll attract the attention of someone with commit privileges. Nate [1] https://github.com/BenPope/utility/commits/develop/numeric_traits_test.cpp
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Nathan Crookston < nathan.crookston@gmail.com> wrote:
Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 11, 2014 01:08 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 04, 2014 12:12 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
Ping
Nobody?
+1. I have no ability to commit this, but the change looks reasonable.
Unfortunately, from the history [1] it looks like those who have done most with this file have been relatively quiet recently.
Hopefully you'll attract the attention of someone with commit privileges.
Seems we need a mechanism where the Community Maintenance Team can step in when this sort of situation arises. I'm traveling for the next week so can't participate, but such a discussion seems worthwhile. --Beman
On 22 April 2014 06:26, Nathan Crookston
Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 11, 2014 01:08 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
On Friday, April 04, 2014 12:12 AM, Ben Pope wrote:
Ping
Nobody?
+1. I have no ability to commit this, but the change looks reasonable.
IMO a better fix would be to convert the static asserts to run time asserts. Maybe I'm missing something as I don't understand why a complicated template implementation is needed here.
Unfortunately, from the history [1] it looks like those who have done most with this file have been relatively quiet recently.
Hopefully you'll attract the attention of someone with commit privileges.
Normally for utility it's best to make it clear which part of utility a change touches so that an appropriate person can pick it up. Although in this case, it looks like the test is for a header in detail, so it's in the wrong module.
participants (4)
-
Beman Dawes -
Ben Pope -
Daniel James -
Nathan Crookston