Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-06 20:40:15
on Wed Nov 04 2009, Vladimir Prus <vladimir-AT-codesourcery.com> wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
>> 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 as "failures"?
>> I realize these can get pretty busy-body at times, but if the user sees
>> several pages of warnings when building Boost it doesn't look so good. So
>> 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
> I would remove -pedantic, but otherwise, it's a very good idea.
Why should we remove -pedantic, specifically?
-- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk