static_assert: doc: nitpicking

[Akim Demaille <akim.demaille@…>]

The following patch is really cosmetic. The doc reads:

   BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT((std::numeric_limits<UnsignedInt>::digits >= 16)
                        && std::numeric_limits<UnsignedInt>::is_specialized
                        && std::numeric_limits<UnsignedInt>::is_integer
                        && !std::numeric_limits<UnsignedInt>::is_signed);

It does not make much sense, imho, to check is_specialized _after_ having already use digits. I know all this is meant to fail, but it makes more sense to check is_specialized first, and the number of digits after we know this is an unsigned int. (FWIW, I would use four assertions, to facilitate the understanding of what failed).

Thanks for Boost, I'm a happy user!

[Akim Demaille <akim.demaille@…>]

doc patch

[John Maddock]

(In [82886]) Use variadic macros in static assert to make use easier. Add warning suppression for GCC. Minor doc fix. Fixes #5810. Fixes #7242. Fixes #7966.