[boost] [program_option] Better compiler checks?

Subject: [boost] [program_option] Better compiler checks?
From: Klaim - Joël Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-10 13:26:48

Hi
I was adding program_option to my prorgam when I discovered a related leak.
Fortunately it was false positive, but it pointed a hidden problem.
I used:
 - Visual Studio 2012
 - Boost 1.51.0
 - Visual Leak Detector to detect the leak

This, generate the leak:

{{{
#include <boost/program_options.hpp>

int main()
{
namespace bpo = boost::program_options;
bpo::options_description options( "Options" );
options.add_options()
( "test" , "Test." )
, ( "value" , bpo::value<int>(), "Value." )
;

}
}}}

The second option is leaking. The reason is because of the comma in the
beginning of the line.
I first added it by reflex when using function arguments so it took me some
time to find what was leaking.
Part of the time I spend was figuring out why it don't leak if you don't
set a value type:

{{{

#include <boost/program_options.hpp>

int main()
{
namespace bpo = boost::program_options;
bpo::options_description options( "Options" );
options.add_options()
( "test" , "Test." )
, ( "value" , "Value." ) // no leak but still wrong!
;

}

}}}

The main problem I see with this is that it is compiled without any problem
nor warning.

So here is my question:
Would it be possible to forbid comma operator with
options_description_easy_init?

I added a ticket for this, #7361 :
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/7361

Joel Lamotte