Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: Bo Persson (bop_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-04 13:18:53
Stewart, Robert wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
>> my suggestion would be that we have two test-runners (if we
>> have any spare!)
>> that build with warnings-as-errors, maybe:
>> -Wall -pedantic -Wstrict-aliasing -fstrict-aliasing -Werror
>> For gcc and:
>> /W3 /WX
>> for MSVC?
> That won't work well for a test-runner will it? On the first
> warning, the build will fail. It would be better to have a report
> of all warnings that must be addressed.
Yes, but it will still not satisfy those who compile at /W4. :-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk