Subject: [ggl] Compilation warning level
From: Barend Gehrels (Barend.Gehrels)
Date: 2009-05-01 05:48:56
> I've noticed that most of Visual C++ projects have warning level
> set to /W1. It isn't much helpful for development.
> So, I'm going to change it to (at least) /W3, if you don't mind.
I agree. It surprised me so I looked at it immediately. Normally I
always compile with warnings on.
I'm now getting what was set why.
In most examples they were all turned on. However, because GD produces
as lot of warnings, they were off. And because the projections
(converted from PROJ4) also produces warnings, they were also turned off.
I noticed that many examples were removed from geometry_examples.sln?
This was probably because of those warnings? I think they should all be
Is it possible to add the warning level in the property sheet? Then it
is easier to configure.
In most tests they were turned off. The tests sometimes deliberately mix
float/double and this produce a lot of irrelevant warnings. But I still
agree, we should have them on or at least compile with warnings on a
I just solved one or two warnings in the new testfiles :-)
> In Jamfiles, I'm going to add -pedantic option for GCC.
I want to react on this anyway (your other mail on CMake). I use
Microsoft and gcc all the time. Because I still don't use bjam I had my
own shellscript to compile gcc. Since I use MinGW (before that I used
cygwin), I have a makefile, which is not checked in because there was
already bjam and vcproj and it is not a beauty.
I had warnings first turned on but probably by projections again, or the
same reasons, they were put off.
I added -pedantic to this this week, thanks for the hint.
So in summary, good you point it out, I agree, warnings are often
helpful and the stuff should compile without warnings.
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net