Boost logo

Boost :

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" <>
> wrote:
> ...

> 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
> warnings
> > 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, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at