Re: [Boost-users] [format] warning...warning...warning

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [format] warning...warning...warning
From: Oswin Krause (Oswin.Krause_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-24 07:17:16

On 2017-03-23 22:35, Steven Watanabe via Boost-users wrote:
> AMDG
> 
> On 03/23/2017 01:51 PM, Oswin Krause wrote:
>> On 2017-03-23 16:43, Steven Watanabe via Boost-users wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The warnings were as trivial as (for example):
>>>> ../ext/boost/boost/type_traits/is_default_constructible.hpp:16:22:
>>>> warning: "BOOST_GCC_VERSION_WORKAROUND_GUARD" is not defined 
>>>> [-Wundef]
>>>> #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_GCC_VERSION, < 40700)
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> <snip>
>> 
>> in this specific case the warning is not a false positive, or useless,
>> at elast as far as i udnerstand it. BOOST_GCC_VERSION_WORKAROUND_GUARD
>> is really not defined anywhere in boost, so this #ifdef block will 
>> never
>> be used.
> 
>   No, that's wrong.  BOOST_WORKAROUND is intentionally
> written so that an undefined XXX_WORKAROUND_GUARD
> functions correctly.  In fact, the sole purpose of
> BOOST_GCC_VERSION_WORKAROUND_GUARD is to suppress the
> warning about BOOST_GCC_VERSION not being defined
> (However, keeping a single global list of macros isn't
> scalable, and it appears that the list isn't up-to-date).

Forget my previous post. I now understood after reading the macro three 
times again (i wrongly thought the guard would be one if the compiler 
was active). Sorry for the noise.