Re: nullptr vs 0

From: Tom Honermann (tom_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-05-30 12:57:36

On 5/29/22 6:56 PM, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> On 29/05/2022 05:39, Andrea Bocci wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 May 2022, 19:15 Soronel Haetir wrote:
>>
>>> Something I would consider useful from a compiler standpoint would be
>>> able to control warnings on a path basis. That is, if it's part of the
>>> system includes (along with other customizable directories), a
>>> different, much more forgiving set of warnings is in effect.
>>
>> Doesn't GCC's "-isystem" do just that ?
>
> It does, but MSVC lacks an equivalent;

Recent MSVC releases now have similar capabilities. See the /external 
<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/reference/external-external-headers-diagnostics?view=msvc-170> 
option.

Tom.

> and both are not entirely consistent about warnings arising from 
> templates that are defined in a system path but then only instantiated 
> later as a result of user code.
>
> Also, that disables all warnings, which can sometimes be too large a 
> hammer to wield.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost