RE: [boost] Stupid Win32 DLL vs Static question

From: Schaible, Joerg (joerg.schaible_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-12 04:46:30

Hi Beman,

>What did you do about the warning messages?  (See below.)  

<g> 

#pragma warning( disable : 4251 )	// needs dll-interface

// here comes the class definition

#pragma warning( default : 4251 )	// needs dll-interface

This warning can be ignored if the base class is implemented completly
inline and has no static member variables. Unfortunately you have to wrap
all your classes that separate the implementation and derive from a complete
inline class with this pragmas. I managed to compile VC6 STL code really
without any warning in level 4, but that is nothing I would advice for boost
- unless you are willing to clatter the complete source with such kind of
pragmas.

>I think I'll 
>just move the timer, etc., implementation into the headers and be done with

>it.  Slightly poorer encapsulation, but much less aggravation.

I always vote encapsultaion :)

Jorg