Re: [boost] Re: Boost Library Guidelines

[Douglas Gregor]

On Wednesday 30 April 2003 06:30 am, Pavol Droba wrote:
 Most of the new warnings can be easily removed with a static_cast. I don't
 understand, why any boost lib have to generate such a warnings.

enters grumpy old developer mode
I agree that it would be great from the user's point of view if all of Boost 
compiled without warnings, but I'm afraid a no-warnings policy will make the 
whack-a-mole game all that much worse. As it stands, some Boost code is 
brittle on certain compilers: tweak in one place, and it breaks a compiler; 
fix for that compiler and you've broken another compiler. 

Doug

___
Unsubscribe  other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Re: Boost Library Guidelines

[William E. Kempf]

Pavol Droba said:
 I have noticed a lot of new warnings in the release 1.30.
 I absuletely agree, that there is no reason to do some kind of line by
 line  pragma suppression.

 But...

 Most of the new warnings can be easily removed with a static_cast. I
 don't understand, why any boost lib have to generate such a warnings.

I'm going to guess that most of the new warnings you see aren't level 4
warnings.  I'll also guess that the crept in for the same reason I missed
some VC warnings in Boost.Threads with 1.30.  That is to say, it happened
because I assumed Boost.Build was setting the warning level to an
appropriate default (i.e. the level that the IDE sets for new projects),
when in fact, it wasn't setting it at all.  I posted about this a while
ago.

If this isn't the cause, then you'll have to ask individual authors,
and/or submit patches.

-- 
William E. Kempf


___
Unsubscribe  other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost