Re: [boost] throw_exception rev. 44954 -> g++ warnings

From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-02 16:30:21

On 5/2/08, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve <rwgk_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > In my opinion, this warning should be issued only if an attempt to
>  > call the non-virtual destructor of a type with virtual functions
>  > through a base class pointer is actually made, not simply because the
>  > possibility exists.
>
> What's the disadvantage of adding the virtual destructors?
>  It certainly is a huge disadvantage  if -Wall cannot be used anymore.
>  Until rev. 44954 everything we have compiled noise-free with -Wall
>  (heaps of sources, many different gcc versions).
>
>  I think the warning is useful. A library author cannot anticipate
>  all situations in which the library may be used. If someone wants
>  to derive from a class in a library and this triggers the smarter
>  warning you propose for the first time, it is probably too late.
>  If the library is part of the system headers it cannot be changed.
>  The user is stuck.

I don't want to turn this into an argument; I only asked if there is
an official Boost policy on the subject. Is there a requirement that
boost compiles with -Wall without warnings on all compilers?

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode