Boris Burger writes:
Hello, the issue with extra semicolons at namespace or class scope is surely nothing new and has been discussed extensively.
Yes, I was one of the instigators...
Still, I am not able to handle its incarnation in ptr_container sources, with G++ 3.4.5 (-ansi -pedantic). It goes like this:
In ptr_map_adapter.hpp (and elsewhere), definition of class template ptr_map_adapter_base contains:
BOOST_PTR_CONTAINER_DEFINE_CONSTRUCTORS( ptr_map_adapter_base, base_type );
at class scope. G++ 3.4.5 reports the extra semicolon as an error (-ansi -pedantic warning level is rather strict here).
... because I was porting our code to GCC 3.4. (More accurately, I was porting our code to 3.4 with the errors and warnings turned all the way up.)
Due to our company's policy lowering the warning levels is not an option. Patching the ptr_container classes would do the trick but that would require rather painful process of going through the Boost sources with each new version and removing extra semicolons.
In fact, I don't think there's a way to lower warning levels to _just_ get rid of the semicolon complaints; you'd also be turning off warnings you want. The only solution I found was to either A) remove the semicolon, or B) to use a macro definition A) is easiest, but may make people's editors unhappy. B) involves something that is either clever, or a bletcherous hack, or both. I've found that things like: namespace empty_namespace_for_semicolons { void allow_semicolon(); } #define ALLOW_SEMICOLON1 \ typedef int semicolon_allowed_after_this_typedef #define ALLOW_SEMICOLON2 \ namespace only_for_semicolon=empty_namespace_for_semicolons #define ALLOW_SEMICOLON3 \ using empty_namespace_for_semicolons::allow_semicolon do the trick; these were suggested by people on this list. You'd then do something like #define PTR_CONTAINER_DEFINE_CONSTRUCTORS(a,b) \ BOOST_PTR_CONTAINER_DEFINE_CONSTRUCTORS( a,b ) ALLOW_SEMICOLON1 And, finally, write your code like this: PTR_CONTAINER_DEFINE_CONSTRUCTORS( ptr_map_adapter_base, base_type ); Clever? Or bletcherous hack? I think both. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dave Steffen, Ph.D. On a paper submitted by a physicist colleague: Software Engineer IV Numerica Corporation "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." ph (970) 419-8343 x27 fax (970) 223-6797 -- Wolfgang Pauli dgsteffen@numerica.us ______________________ Numerica Disclaimer: This message and any attachments are intended only for the individual or entity to which the message is addressed. It is proprietary and may contain privileged information. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in reliance upon, the information in this communication is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you feel you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by returning this Email to the sender and deleting it from your computer.