On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
Stewart, Robert wrote:
While not as easy for you as some yet undiscovered change to noncopyable, can't you just use the MSVC pragma warning dance around your classes to quiet that warning in each case?
Of course I can conditionaly include pragma for this compiler.
At that point, isn't it less work to just declare the copy c-tor and the assignment operator private? The MSDN documentation says that this will silence the warning. I guess it would have been nice of them to look in base classes as well when considering this warning...
The problem is that you start have to doing for all compilers and they've all got their own set of quirks. This makes the code harder to read, understand and maintain. You HAVE to do it sometimes to work around bogus compiler errors but I'm sort of reluctant to embark upon this to work around bogus compiler warnings. This raises the question about how to handle the "warning" that such and such a function has been "deprecated" when it actually hasn't and of course those warnings which are just hints that sometimes have to be knowingly violated.
Basically, once you start considering this - it sort of takes on a life of its own.
I think the proper way to deal with those warnings is documentation that states that Boost libraries may emit those warnings unless _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS _SCL_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS are defined. C++ didn't deprecate those functions, Microsoft did, so it's no longer Boost's concern. --Michael Fawcett