Re: [boost] Are warnings acceptable artifacts from builds?

Subject: Re: [boost] Are warnings acceptable artifacts from builds?
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-11 19:28:30

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> AMDG
>
> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It isn't quite as fine-grained as msvc's mechanism, but you can use
>>> #pragma GCC system_header
>>> It seems to handle templates okay in recent versions.
>>>
>>
>> I was wondering if the GCC pragma works well. If it really does, why
>> not just add it in boost/config and be done with it. :)
>>
>
> As I understand it, the pragma operates only on the header it's in,
> so I don't see how it can easily be factored out.

Oh right, what a lame suggestion I made :)

Well umm I'm not sure it's helpful at all then. It would be nice to be
able to pass to the compiler a list of paths it should consider
"3rd-party" and not warn unless the warning depends on user
constructs, which I guess fits your statement that it handles
templates okay. But maybe that's problematic for the same reasons
pragma once is.

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