From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-01-12 09:15:35
At 10:46 AM 1/12/2001 +0100, Schaible, Joerg wrote:
>>What did you do about the warning messages? (See below.)
>#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
>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
>- unless you are willing to clatter the complete source with such kind of
Agreed. I'm not about to suggest messing up perfectly clean code like
boost::noncopyable with VC++ pragmas. To do it consistently, it would have
to be done to classes which might be used as base classes even though they
usually aren't. Ugh.
>>I think I'll
>>just move the timer, etc., implementation into the headers and be done
>>it. Slightly poorer encapsulation, but much less aggravation.
>I always vote encapsultaion :)
I probably shouldn't have said encapsulation. It is really more a case of
slightly increased coupling in the .hpp's to some standard library headers.
But if there is a problem with those headers, the .cpp's won't compile
anyhow, so I'm not sure it really matters much.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk