On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
I would like the trunk tests and display matrix to add a couple of options for each platform.
currently it includes OS, compiler, compiler version, etc.
I would like to add
a) warning level b) optimization level
I agree with this (perhaps no need to test at multiple warning levels) but I'll point out yet another reason why this warnings discussion is silly: Q: How do we know that Boost Exception works when RTTI is disabled? A: I'm personally testing on whatever GCC I have installed and on MSVC 8/9, and I don't see anyone complaining about other platforms. We don't test optimized builds, we don't test with exceptions or RTTI disabled, but apparently that "class foo has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor" is more important. Also, before drafting a policy on warnings, is it a good idea to draft a policy on RTTI support? I'm asking because I like to think that no-RTTI support solves real problems for some users yet we're OK without an official policy -- for example, no-RTTI support was added to Boost Exception by strong demand from the users, and I would have added it even if we had an official policy that required RTTI. Emil Dotchevski Reverge Studios, Inc. http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode