From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-09 14:00:08
I suggest that I wait for the 30.1 release to be available, retest with strict
mode and then mail you off-list with results from .net 2003 aka 7.1.
| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Jeff Garland
| Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 3:06 PM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: RE: [boost] Re: time_duration bug in Boost 1.30.0
| On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:53:30 +0100, Paul A. Bristow wrote
| > I have built the date examples OK, but I am getting a compile error
| > when trying to build the time_math.cpp example with MSVC 7.1 aka
| > .net 2003
| > I:/boost_1_30_0\boost\lexical_cast.hpp(147) : error C2679: binary
| > '<<' : no operator found which takes a right-hand operand of type 'const
| > I am not clear if this is a problem in lexical_cast or in date_time.
| > Should I wait for the 1.30.1 release or try to load an update? Or
| > is this a new problem?
| Sorry to be slow on the response. Glad to see you got the fix for this, it
| has bitten alot of people...
| > PS There are also lots of confusing warnings, most, if not all, of
| > which I suspect could be casted away. It would be really nice to get
| I believe several of the warnings have been resolved in the current CVS...
| > a clear compile, preferably in strict mode, because this code is
| > likely to be included by most user stuff, which will repeatedly
| > produce a host of junk warnings.
| I'm happy to work on reducing the warnings in level 4, but unfortunately the
| regression tests are not run with these settings. Since I don't have access
| to the .net compiler here it is difficult to get the needed feedback to
| resolve them. So if we want to make this a requirement we definitely need
| regression tests to use this policy.
| > (And other MS specific unhelpful warnings which could be dealt with by
| > #ifdef _MSC_VER or BOOST_?
| > #pragma warning (disable : 4800) // inefficient bool conversion?
| > #endif
| > As a general point, is there any reason why 'known to be unhelpful' warnings
| > like this cannot be disabled in Boost code?
| I'd be fine with putting this in the config, but I could see some controversy
| about this. It isn't entirely clear to me which code is producing these,
| so maybe you can send me the details offlist and I can look into it.
| Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk