Subject: Re: [boost] Standalone boost::ignore_unused_variable_warning()
From: Adam Wulkiewicz (adam.wulkiewicz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-19 17:21:06
Glen Fernandes wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Antony Polukhin wrote:
>> I'd prefer to see a single function name, not two:
>> boost::ignore_unused_variables(v1) ;
>> boost::ignore_unused_variables(v1, v2, v3);
>> boost::utility:: namespace looks reasonable. +1
> It feels more like a workaround, than a utility, and so I would have
> thought that:
> a. The more natural home is Boost.Config
> b. The macro approaches were preferable
> I also like the idea of not adding new things to Boost.Utility going
> forward (even if they only depend on Boost.Config).
I wasn't aware that the Utility is such unconvenient library for adding
AFAIU Config provides macros which can be used in conditional
compilation. AFAIK there are no "tools" there. Or am I wrong?
I thought also about Detail but this tool was originally defined in
namespace boost, and btw could be used by the users too.
And I remember that some time ago there was a discussion about not
adding things in the global namespace/directory.
Hence Utility because it seemed to be a "library" for orphaned tools.
But I have no preference regarding the placement.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk