Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-10 02:30:39

so, as discussed before, <warning>all often produces way too many warnings,
and this makes regression testing with Boost troublesome, and is generally

Good point made by several people, though, is that <warning>all should mean
exactly "all warnings". On most compilers, the setting will produce way too
many output, and will require additional workarounds, so it's not good as

So what about this:

- make <warnings>on the default
- make <warnings>on translate to some "reasonable" set of warnings. For gcc,
this will be -Wall, for msvc -- /W3
- make <warnings>all translate to maximum warnings possible, expecting the
user to use <warnings>all only if he's ready to dig though the heaps of
compiler output? For gcc this will be "-Wall -pedantic", for msvc -- "/W4",
for intel -- w4

Essentially, the idea is to assume <warnings>on is the common setting, and
really use maximum warning level for <warnings>all.

Is this fine with everybody? Note that the question if we should pass no
warning option unless user gave explicit value for <warnings> is a separate
one, and can be decided separately.

- Volodya

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