From: Björn Karlsson (Bjorn.Karlsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-26 09:34:28
> From: Markus Schöpflin [mailto:markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]]
[snip]
> Please, please, please, don't change the config. I just
> managed to get it
> turned off. :-) It breaks for all usages where the enum value
> won't fit
> in a normal integer...
>
> I can provide patches as I encounter problems or as problems
> are reported
> to me, but please don't change the config.
>
> Markus
I was afraid you'd say that...
I'll apply the patches (for bool_c and integral_c) that started this thread.
So, should we augment these ~800 BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANTs? If that's what we
decide to do, I'd like to wait until 1_29_0 is shipping, and everything has
been merged back to the trunk. And there'll be a new macro
(BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT_DEFINITION, or similar) to streamline usage.
I'd really like some more opinions on this issue (because it does have an
effect on most libraries).
Constantly and statically yours,
Bjorn Karlsson