On 30.08.2010 20:59, Stewart, Robert wrote:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
I honestly don't understand those who think that warning-free code is somehow more solid than the code which emits warnings.
The intended goal is to allow Boost users to focus on warnings from their own code, at whatever warnings level they like. The more warnings Boost code triggers, the more such users will grow to ignore all warnings which means compilers cannot assist them in writing safer code.
The suggestion to be able to suppress all warnings from Boost headers does that, with some possibility of suppressing some triggered by user interaction with Boost code that shouldn't be ignored.
As I said, users can already disable all warnings from third party headers. The suggested macro-switch in Boost does little better here, doesn't worth the hassle, IMHO.