From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-09 19:10:03
On Feb 9, 2006, at 8:14 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Matthias Troyer wrote:
>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
>>
>>> This has been mentioned from time to time and will eventually be
>>> changed.
>>>
>>> The original rationale was that in some platforms it was 64 bits
>>> which seemed wasteful for binary archives - that is 2 G Objects
>>> seemed enough.
>>>
>>> Now it seems that we'll really need a special type for collection
>>> count.
>>>
>>> In anycase, it can't be just changed without making obsolete
>>> existing
>>> archives - so its kind of a slow process.
>>
>> It can still be changed and be backward-compatible by bumping the
>> version number.
>>
>
> That's what I was refering to. That effectively means that it can
> only be changed between boost versions - one can't just make
> the fix on his particular system.
>
> It's still not clear what this should be changed to - if in fact it
> should
> be changed at all. std::size_t is a candidate - but I was under the
> impression that there might be interest in defining a special type
> for this - like collection_size_t or ?
Indeed that's what's needed, and I have all the patches ready that
would need to be applied to do it.
Matthias