Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: Daniel James (daniel_james_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-06 08:59:49
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> By "stuff," I assume Paul meant "libraries," as in "no new libraries accepted into Boost unless warning free." That's fair, if it is established and known before a review begins.
Currently, we don't even require that a library builds on any specific
compilers, let alone warning free. What you're suggesting adds a
considerable burden on a developer - which is particularly unfair if
the library is eventually rejected. Implementation issues can be fixed
after the review and, in this case, I would hope it would be with the
help of the boost community.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk