Subject: Re: [boost] [new Warnings policy] MS C4180 on the Maintenance Guidelines
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-18 05:51:54
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
> Emil Dotchevski
> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:15 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [new Warnings policy] MS C4180 on the Maintenance
> Why not replace all that by "No warnings should be emitted by Boost
> code. Use your best judgment to either fix or suppress the warning"
> followed by information on how warnings can be suppressed on various
> A) Users don't care why they don't see warnings.
I think they *do* care about code quality, and dealing with warnings makes a
contribution (perhaps small).
> B) Even if they did, if the build log has no warnings it is prohibitively
difficult to investigate why that is.
Sorry, but I'm not clear what part you suggest replacing.
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk