-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Daniel James Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 11:14 AM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] Towards a Warning free code policy proposal
On 28 August 2010 10:26, John Maddock <boost.regex@virgin.net> wrote:
Last year there where two long threads about Boost Warning policy. If I'm not wrong nothing was concluded. I think that we can have two warning policies: one respect to the Boost users and one internal for Boost developement.
There was some progress towards fixing warnings:
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/WarningFixes
Also I'm fairly sure that Paul Bristow started a "How to fix warnings" guidelines page, but I can't find it right now :-(
Oh, sorry about that. I removed the links when I moved the guidelines back to the main website and forgot to provide a way to find the wiki guidelines.
More specifically for your bookmarks ;-) https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines I think a major problem is that gcc doesn't allow as localised warning suppression as MSVC. gcc users could usefully 'moan louder' about this. It will always be necessary to suppress warnings - if only when the compiler is raising a false alarm, and it won't be fixed for some time. A recent example is at http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/586147/warning-c4 224-is-given-for-correct-code-if-ms-extensions-are-disabled http://tinyurl.com/2blmq3l This will prevent the hapless user, condemned to use \Za, getting a 4 page slap in the face for having the temerity to ask for a student's t value! But C4224 warnings can be valid and useful, so warning suppression really should be localised. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB UK +44 1539 561830 07714330204 pbristow@hetp.u-net.com