Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-05 04:36:35
> I'm *not* saying we should do this for 1.41, but should we have an
> official policy regarding compiler warnings and which ones we regard
> I realize these can get pretty busy-body at times, but if the user
> several pages of warnings when building Boost it doesn't look so good.
> It not only doesn't look good. It isn't good.
No disagreement from me.
Some stats might help:
Boost-1.41 pre-beta on ubutunu-9.1 with gcc-4.4.1 produces an 11 Mb log file
from the build, with 133 THOUSAND LINES of output.
And that's just from building the binaries - so a tiny subset of Boost - I
dread to think what a full test build would reveal.
In fact the more I think about this, the more I feel that we should fix as
much of this as we can for 1.41.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk