id	summary	reporter	owner	description	type	status	milestone	component	version	severity	resolution	keywords	cc
7966	static_assert: doc: nitpicking	Akim Demaille <akim.demaille@…>	John Maddock	"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!"	Bugs	closed	To Be Determined	static_assert	Boost 1.52.0	Cosmetic	fixed	doc