Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-12 14:06:16
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
> Stewart, Robert
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:58 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
> If the purpose of the test is to show that variant triggers the same warning
as would an
> ordinary int-to-short assignment, getting the warning here is a good thing.
> If the purpose of the test is to prove that assigning to variant has the same
> behavior as non-variant code, as I suggested above, the warning is unwarranted
I think *both* are valid purposes (though I suspect that the original author
wasn't being as clever as that ;-)
PS have we flogged this to death yet?
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk