On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Thomas Klimpel<Thomas.Klimpel@synopsys.com> wrote:
Thomas Klimpel wrote:
- It is true that msvc-9 spits out many warnings. However, it is also true that "warning C4127: conditional expression is constant" for a code like template <typename value_type, typename geometry_type_1, typename geometry_type_2, int op_type> void execute_boolean_op(value_type& output_, const geometry_type_1& lvalue_, const geometry_type_2& rvalue_, ... if(op_type < 2) is nonsense, because op_type is a template parameter. So I have the impression that the only way to get rid of the msvc warnings is by disabling the nonsense warnings with appropriate pragmas.
Well, it's right. That's a constant conditional expression. You can either ignore the warning or put it in a template specialization which would get rid of the warning. Is it defined in the standard that the conditional will *always* get optimized away? If it isn't, that seems like a reasonable warning.
I don't know what about the boost way to silence warnings, but if it is along the line of
#ifdef BOOST_WARNING_MSVC_WORKAROUND #pragma warning(push) #pragma warning(disable:4127) #endif
...
#ifdef BOOST_WARNING_MSVC_WORKAROUND #pragma warning(pop) #endif
then silencing 60+ warnings in this way will add 420+ lines to the source code.
I don't think that works with templates. Typically to silence errors in template code, the user must put those pragmas around the point of instantiation. The warnings I saw were int->bool, bool->int conversions, unused parameters, and struct now seen as class. I agree some warnings are nonsense, but there are some cases (just mentioned) that should be silenced by proper code changes. I don't think a strict "no warning" policy needs to be in place, which I think is what Emil is against, but I think Boost should strive to have as few as possible and there's too much low hanging fruit waiting to be picked currently (causing lots of noise). --Michael Fawcett