Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [new Warnings policy] what to do about msvc "deprecation" and "unsafe" warnings
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-16 05:28:30

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
Behalf Of
> Robert Ramey
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 5:56 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] [new Warnings policy] what to do about msvc "deprecation" and
> warnings
> I've implemented the suggestions in "new warnings policy". It probably DID
> catch a few bugs which have probably been in there for years. It wasn't as
> bad as I thought - mostly tedium and a few hours of testing. But now I have
> a couple of questions:
> a) I added
> <toolset>gcc:<warnings>all # ?
> <toolset>msvc:<warnings>all # == /W4
> To my jamfile.
> With MSVC 9.0 I now get a blizzard of "deprecation" and "unsafe" warnings.
> If the policy is updated to address this, I will implement the
> recommendations.
> Robert Ramey
> PS
> I'm wondering if I should replace the above with something which maximizes
> the warning level for all compiles. Perhaps just
> <warnings>all #?

Would adding the MSVC *_SECURE_* defines to NOT deprecate the 'insecure' version

    : requirements

      # The define of macros below prevent warnings about the checked versions
of SCL and CRT libraries.
      # Most Boost code does not need these versions (as they are markedly

      # Alternatively, you can just suppress the warnings (probably not the
best way).
      <toolset>msvc:<cxxflags>/wd4996 # 'putenv': The POSIX name for this item
is deprecated. (and other similar deprecations).

As suggested in

This may also deal with the "unsafe"?


Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, UK   LA8 8AB
+44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at