[boost] Anoying borland warnings

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-21 00:37:07

It one will take a look on into compiler report it see a lot of Borland
warnings like this:
Superfluous & with function in function ...
Borland think that & in front of function name is superfluous.
Since nobody but Borland complains about this I added following to the
requirement section on Boost.Test Jamfile:
<borland><*><cxxflags>-w-8001
It seems to suppress it. May be we should consider adding this to borland
tools definition?

Absolutely similar proposition about warning 8080
<something> is declared but never used in <somewhere>.
There are a lot of cases (in Boost.Test particularly) where it is absolutely
legitimate. To suppress it I use
<borland><*><cxxflags>-w-8080

or as combination
<borland><*><cxxflags>"-w-8001 -w-8080"

Comments?

Gennadiy.