Subject: Re: [boost] Official warnings policy?
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-10 08:15:11
Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Stewart, Robert
> <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> >> Alternatively, the reviewers could compile at lower warnings level.
> >> Most likely they wouldn't even need to do that, because they will
> >> simply build using the author scripts, which will likely produce a
> >> build without warnings.
> > Either is certainly possible, but if there are established
> > warning levels, it
> > is reasonable to expect that level or stricter.
> This assumes that a policy that requires warnings to be "fixed" is
> desirable or that it will lead to a better Boost (note that I'm not
> arguing against disabling warnings in Boost headers.)
I have made no such assumption. In every post, I have used the phrase, "established warning levels," and the like. We have none presently. We have no policy regarding warnings as yet.
In the quote above, I even phrased it as, "if there are established warning levels." There's no assumption in that.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk