1 May
2014
1 May
'14
4:46 p.m.
On 1 May 2014 17:23, Chris Cooper wrote:
Shouldn’t boost have one or the other?
Why?
Either warnings are important enough to treat them as errors in the unit tests (in which case they should get fixed) or else they’re not that important and warnings-as-errors shouldn’t be enabled by default anywhere?
I think that's a false dichotomy. If a particular library does compile warning-free, whether because it's the intention of that library's maintainer or by chance, your view seems to be that it must not be allowed to use -Werror because some other libraries can't or won't or just don't use it.