Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-07 12:20:33

Next message: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] [fusion] fusion sequence of non-copy-constructible types"
Previous message: Michael Marcin: "Re: [boost] determining if an object is faster to pass by value or const reference"
In reply to: Juergen Hunold: "[boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""
Next in thread: Juergen Hunold: "Re: [boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""
Reply: Juergen Hunold: "Re: [boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""

AMDG

Juergen Hunold wrote:
> Should we rise the warning level by _always_ activating "-pedantic" at least
> for the test suite ?
>

The gcc stdcxx tests fail with -pedantic, because the standard library uses
long long without protecting it.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe

Next message: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] [fusion] fusion sequence of non-copy-constructible types"
Previous message: Michael Marcin: "Re: [boost] determining if an object is faster to pass by value or const reference"
In reply to: Juergen Hunold: "[boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""
Next in thread: Juergen Hunold: "Re: [boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""
Reply: Juergen Hunold: "Re: [boost] [test][gcc] return value support broken with "-pedantic""

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view