Re: Warning 4786

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-10-30 15:40:06

--- In boost_at_y..., "Paul Hollingsworth" <boost_at_P...> wrote:
> I have run into the same problem - bad STL headers doesn't explain 
> everything.
> 
> However, I did find that #including <iostream> always seemed to 
work.
> 
> I ended up reducing it down to this header file which I include:
> disable4786.h
> #pragma warning(disable:4786)
> // http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q167/3/55.ASP
> // states that yes, it's a compiler bug that #pragma warning
(disable: 
> 4786)
> // doesn't always work.
> 
> // They don't, however, list a workaround.
> 
> // I found that, very strangely, #including <iostream> made the
> // remaining 4786 warnings go away!
> 
> // Of course, #including <iostream> is inefficient and
> // slows compilation - so I whittled away most of what's in
> // <iostream> and discovered that the "active ingredient" in 
> <iostream>
> // appears to be a declaration of a static class, complete with
> // default constructor.
> 
> // For some reason, this works around the bug!
> 
> // Why does this work? Beats me, ask those smart guys at MS who 
wrote 
> the
> // compiler.
> class msVC6_4786WorkAround {
> public:
> 	msVC6_4786WorkAround() {}
> 	};
> 
> static msVC6_4786WorkAround 
> WowIWonderWhatCrapCodeMustBeInTheCompilerToMakeThisWorkaroundWork;

Interesting.  If this actually works should we include this in the 
Boost.Config files?

Bill Kempf