-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Stephan T. Lavavej Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 1:43 AM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [Wiki] Changes in information about gcc warnings.
[Paul A. Bristow]
I'm only reporting what it says in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2c8f766e%28v=VS.100%29.aspx "The compiler only supports up to 56 #pragma warning statements in a compiland." I'm not *quite* sure what that means either (or why even?).
I asked Tanveer Gani, our compiler front-end dev lead, and he said that this is simply incorrect: "Maybe "10^" got accidentally deleted? :-) I can't imagine why there'd be a limit for the number of #pragma warnings and the warning state stack uses linked nodes, not a static array."
My own experiments have also encountered no such limit. I've filed a bug (DevDiv#122565) telling our doc team to remove this sentence.
Well that's very helpful - as well as quite amusing ;-) And Good News too. (I'm kicking myself for not querying this before! 52 seemed a bizarre number - we might be even more amused to know how it crept in).
But I suspect it explains why this method of warning suppression doesn't always work.
#pragma warning has surprising interactions with templates, and certain codegen warnings must be applied at the level of functions instead of individual statements, but push/disable/pop by itself shouldn't have problems.
Thanks for this, which is duly noted and referenced in our document. https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines Paul --- Paul A. Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB UK +44 1539 561830 07714330204 pbristow@hetp.u-net.com