Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?

Subject: Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-11-27 15:23:48

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of John Maddock via Boost
> Sent: 19 November 2018 19:44
> To: Brian Kuhl via Boost
> Cc: John Maddock
> Subject: Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?
> 
> 
> On 19/11/2018 19:20, Brian Kuhl via Boost wrote:
> > I'd like to confirm the guidance on Warnings I find here
> > https://svn.boost.org/trac10/wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines
> > is still considered current?
> 
> 
> More or less - the advice could use updating, and each new compiler
> release brings new warnings, some busy-body some not, so it's a constant
> struggle to catch up.

> >
> > At Wind River we are in the process of working with Boost 1.68 and VxWorks
> > 7 (with Dinkum 7.00  with and Clang  6.0 for ARM and IA boards and  GCC 8.1
> > for PowerPC ) with the hope of bundling Boost with our product.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > While we have not traditionally required zero warnings in open source code
> > shipped with our product, there is pressure on us to move in that
> > direction, and as result we will probably be contributing pull requests
> > specifically to fix or suppress compiler warnings over the coming years.
> >
> > I'd like to establish clear guidelines for my team as to what is an
> > appropriate "coding standard" for Boost in regards to compiler warnings.
> > While it is simple to say, everything displayed by -Wall, in practice there
> > are many edge cases,  e.g. is an unused parameter acceptable in test code?
> > So I'd like to get the maintainers guidance.
> > Brian Kuhl

Triggered by this thread, I went to consider updating 

https://svn.boost.org/trac10/wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines

but that is now frozen, so I can't do change it.

In particular I wanted to add a link to

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/12/13/broken-warnings-theory/

which discusses the issue, and adds info on some additional finer-grained warning suppression aids added in recent VS 15.6 ...

I'm willing to get things rolling with the current guidelines, but

IMO, it should be freely editable wiki so that anyone can add (or delete). 

Seems that is need a new section somewhere on boost.org but I'd like views and guidance on where, what and how.

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal UK LA8 8AB
[phone]