From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-04 22:14:42
On 5/4/07, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> on Wed May 02 2007, "Jonathan Franklin" <franklin.jonathan-AT-gmail.com>
> This is certainly the case with the MS compiler, who even at lower warning
> > levels tends to make spurious comments about your code (not really
> > at all).
> At least it gives me the #pragmas I need to silence them.
Indeed. It's a shame that gcc doesn't provide a good 'prama disable'.
> However with gcc (and possibly other compilers), building w/ -Wall
> > -Werror is tenable, and is usually the Right Thing. We have done
> > this on the last several (extremely large) projects I have worked
> > on.
> In my experience it's the Right Thing for certain common coding
> styles, but completely wrong for others.
Hence 'usually'. My coding style apparently falls amongst the common.
For example, GCC has a
> warning about a derived class whose base doesn't have a virtual dtor.
> It's actually *impossible* (not just inefficient or convoluted) to
> implement is_polymorphic without generating that warning.
Interesting. I'm obviously flaunting my ignorance, but I didn't realize
that inheriting from a class sans virtual dtor was ever a Good Thing. I'll
have to read up on the issues WRT is_polymorphic.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk