Boost logo

Boost :

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-10 10:01:31

>-----Original Message-----
>From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Andreas Huber
>Sent: 10 August 2007 13:29
>To: boost_at_[hidden]
>Subject: Re: [boost] warning suppression
>Steven Watanabe <watanabesj <at>> writes:
>> ./boost/statechart/detail/rtti_policy.hpp
>> ./boost/statechart/detail/state_base.hpp
>> ./boost/statechart/state_machine.hpp
>All disabled warnings carry the following comment:
>// We permanently turn off the following level 4 warnings
>because users will
>// have to do so themselves anyway if we turn them back on
>The warnings in question are:
># pragma warning( disable: 4511 ) // copy constructor could
>not be generated
># pragma warning( disable: 4512 ) // assignment op could not
>be generated
>IMO, these warnings are not very useful. Users will get heaps
>of them when they
>employ the library, so disabling them permanently is a good thing.

OK, OK, OK - you won't get a Trac from me ;-)

Clearly, if we are to enforce push'n'pop, we need to have an opt-out.

But I don't want to make a mountain out of a modest molehill.

Won't a check slow down commit?

On the other hand, the time when it is least trouble to correct or declare it deliberate is at commit time.


PS There are similar features in gcc... but let's not go there just yet?

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at