Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-08 09:02:37

Rene Rivera <grafik.list <at>> writes:
> > 2. In boost::fsm all state classes contain virtual member functions but
> > have non-virtual destructors. GCC rightly issues a warning on this,
> > the gcc toolset and all its extensions (AFAICT, there are currently 5)?
> > Someday someone will add another extension and the warnings that are
> > disabled for the already existing extensions will appear for the new
> > extension until my Jamfile is adapted.
> I'm not sure what your question is here?? O'wait by "extensions" you
> mean the difference gcc toolsets?

Right. The toolsets are gcc, gcc-stlport, gcc-nocygwin, mingw and mingw-stlport.

> that's the case you can use the
> somewhat undocumented feature of property rules...
> rule toolset::no-warn-non-virtual-dtor ( toolset variant :
> subvariant-path properties * )
> {
> switch $(toolset)
> {
> case gcc* :
> return
> $(subvariant-path) $(properties)
> <cxxflags>-Wno-non-virtual-dtor ;
> case * :
> return
> $(subvariant-path) $(properties) ;
> }
> }

This assumes that all gcc toolsets start with gcc. We also have the mingw
toolsets. Of course I could add those with a separate "case mingw*:" but if
someone introduces a new gcc toolset extension that has a completely different
name then this doesn't work anymore, right? Then again, gcc toolsets aren't
added on a monthly basis, so I guess this isn't really that important.

> Sounding like a broken record... Yes in BBv2, but not in BBv1

Ok, this leaves me with one last question: Will 1.33 be built with V2?


It certainly did. Thanks!


Andreas Huber
When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the 
address shown in the header.

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at