Subject: Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?
From: Hans Dembinski (hans.dembinski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-11-21 08:48:42
> On 20. Nov 2018, at 20:14, Daniela Engert via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Am 19.11.2018 um 20:20 schrieb Brian Kuhl via Boost:
>> Many of our customers make certified systems ( Planes, Trains, Medical
>> Equipment, Factory Automation, etc. ) and the trend in theses industries is
>> to be pedantic about eliminating all compiler warnings.
> I run our in-house Boost distribution with the same policy (geared
> towards Visual Studio). It took me tons of work over several years to
> get there but during the process of auditing every warning (and dealing
> with it one way or the other) I actually found errors. Beyond that, the
> tests have to pass not only in debug build like the test matrix does but
> also in release build, plus both 32 bit and 64 bit. Each one of the four
> modes exhibits different sets of warnings and errors in some libraries.
> Some libraries are poster-childs of careful programming, others - even
> new ones - less so.
> That may sound egregious but this is how we develop our software for
> industrial QA machines.
just for my curiosity, are you regularly merging these changes back upstream into Boost or do you maintain a list of patches to apply to each new Boost release?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk