Re: [jamboost] -isystem and warnings

From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-27 23:49:22

[2002-10-27] David Abrahams wrote:

>Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> [2002-10-27] David Abrahams wrote:
>> 
>> >Rene Rivera <grafik666_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> >
>> >> [2002-10-27] David Abrahams wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >
>> >> >In some of my Boost.Build v2 testing I've encountered warnings from
>> >> >GCC because we're normally using -isystem to add Boost headers as
part
>> >> >of the #include <...> -only search path (there appears to be no other
>> >> >way). I'm beginning to think that we have to give up on -isystem,
>> >> >since it causes so many problems, including that on some platforms it
>> >> >adds an implicit extern "C" { } wrapper. For the record, I still
think
>> >> >we're doing the right thing by using angle-includes for boost.
>> >> 
>> >> That's fine for GCC, but if we switch to "-I" we'll probably get other
>> >> warnings. 
>> >
>> >I don't understand what you're saying. We'll get warnings 
>> >with other compilers if we switch GCC to use "-I" for
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> ><sysinclude>? You can't mean _that_.
>> 
>> I do mean it... I used to get some rather silly warnings, like the very
>> anoying "no newline at eof" but only for <> files not "" files without
>> -isystem. I remember others but can't rmember the specifics, and it was
in
>> my code not Boost code ;-)
>
>How will changing what we do for GCC affect other compilers?

Haha, oops, missed the "other compilers" part!

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera_at_[hidden] - grafik_at_[hidden]
-- 102708583_at_icq - Grafik666_at_AIM - Grafik_at_[hidden]