Subject: Re: [boost] Bug report rejected as conformant
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-13 23:53:04
Edward Diener wrote:
> But when the answer argues that they are conformant because in the
> particular case a warning is valid for establishing conformance, then I
> cannot understand it. We might as well say that any compiler which issues
> warnings whenever a compiler error should occur, simply because it can
> continue compiling, is a valid C or C++ conformant compiler.
It is. That's what the standard says. Whether a diagnostic starts with the
word "error" or the word "warning" is irrelevant for conformance.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk