From: Steven Watanabe (steven_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-13 15:40:45
Andreas Huber <ahd6974-spamboostorgtrap <at> yahoo.com> writes:
> Unless I'm missing something, adding
> static asserts to simple_state (as you do in the class template C) would not
> work as the compiler would then try to generate copy functions for the
> user-defined classes only to issue an error when it tries to instantiate
> simple_state copy functions.
No. The compiler will only generate the /declarations/ if they are not used.
See section 12.8 of the standard.
> I ask again: If you really do care so much about these warnings then why
> don't you simply reenable them after including the headers that disable
> them? As Bo has mentioned, chances are that other headers that you include
> also disable these warnings.
Most users including myself don't want to search
headers just to find what warnings they need to turn
back on. The fact that some other headers turn off
the warnings is no excuse. They should be fixed too, IMO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk