On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
My point is that the warning-free requirement (at high levels) seems quite specific and, to my mind, quite pointless. Additionally, suppressing all warnings in all Boost headers is (a) compiler-specific, (b) tedious and (c) may not be what the user actually wants. Therefore let the users decide what and how to do about warnings.
Here's my suggestion: * We make no requirement on developers that they address warnings * We choose a warning level we're going to test at for each compiler * On our testing pages we publish the number of warnings for each test along with the number of errors * On our guidelines page we publish a list of safe ways to "avoid" various warnings (e.g. use implicit conversions) and perhaps less-safe ways to "suppress" them (e.g. use a cast). -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com