C++ Template Metaprogramming
For the past year Aleksey Gurtovoy and I have been working on a new book, titled _C++ Template Metaprogramming: Concepts, Tools and Techniques from Boost and Beyond_. The book has recently entered copyediting. If you're interested you can peruse some sample chapters at http://boost-consulting.com/mplbook. Regards, Dave -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Ok this is bit off topic since it isn't directly related to boost, but I know there are a lot C++ guru's here, and I'm sure one of you has addressed this. I am using Andrei's ScopeGuard and not boosts. I have googled, but I haven't figured out how to turn off the "unused variable" warning in g++, with out disabling all warnings. My guess is that there is no solution, but I thought I would try here first. TIA, Christopher
Christopher Baus wrote:
Ok this is bit off topic since it isn't directly related to boost, but I know there are a lot C++ guru's here, and I'm sure one of you has addressed this.
I am using Andrei's ScopeGuard and not boosts. I have googled, but I haven't figured out how to turn off the "unused variable" warning in g++, with out disabling all warnings. My guess is that there is no solution, but I thought I would try here first.
Unless I'm missing something, this should do the trick: g++ -c -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused-variable foo.cpp Hope this helps, Stephen Jackson
Unless I'm missing something, this should do the trick:
g++ -c -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused-variable foo.cpp
I was hoping there was some way to modify ON_BLOCK_EXIT, so I could leave the unused variable warning, but only disable it for ScopeGuard with a pragma.
Unless I'm missing something, this should do the trick:
g++ -c -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused-variable foo.cpp
Ok, I found the solution. I was looking for a pragma to do it, but the solution for gcc is the use the unused attribute.
Cheers, Christopher
"Christopher Baus" <christopher@baus.net> writes:
Unless I'm missing something, this should do the trick:
g++ -c -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused-variable foo.cpp
Ok, I found the solution. I was looking for a pragma to do it, but the solution for gcc is the use the unused attribute.
I think an idiomatic solution is : int unused ; unused ; --drkm, en recherche d'un stage : http://www.fgeorges.org/ipl/stage.html
"drkm" <darkman_spam@yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:wku0vz3zc1.fsf@yahoo.fr... "Christopher Baus" <christopher@baus.net> writes:
Unless I'm missing something, this should do the trick:
g++ -c -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused-variable foo.cpp
Ok, I found the solution. I was looking for a pragma to do it, but the solution for gcc is the use the unused attribute.
I think an idiomatic solution is : int unused ; unused ; Rene Rivera proposed this: namespace boost { namespace detail { inline void no_unused_variable_warning(void*) { } } } #define BOOST_NO_UNUSED_VARIABLE_WARNING(v) \ ::boost::detail::no_unused_variable_warning(&(v)) See namespace boost { namespace detail { inline void no_unused_variable_warning(void*) { } } } http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg54904.phpJonathan
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message news:cdv6a1$5t8$1@sea.gmane.org...
I think an idiomatic solution is :
int unused ; unused ;
The above should have been attributed to drkm. Jonathan
"Christopher Baus" <christopher@baus.net> wrote in message news:34024.66.215.139.141.1090474786.squirrel@mail.baus.net...
Ok this is bit off topic since it isn't directly related to boost, but I know there are a lot C++ guru's here, and I'm sure one of you has addressed this.
I am using Andrei's ScopeGuard and not boosts. I have googled, but I haven't figured out how to turn off the "unused variable" warning in g++, with out disabling all warnings. My guess is that there is no solution, but I thought I would try here first.
Joaquín M López Muñoz has a version of Anrei's scope guard in his recently accepted multi_index library. To prevent these warnings, he adds a no-op member void touch() cont { } to scope_guard_impl_base. Then, in his version of ON_BLOCK_EXIT (which is customized for his library, and so not generally useful) expands to something like this: const scope_guard_impl_base& guard = make_guard( ... ); guard.touch(); Jonathan
Then, in his version of ON_BLOCK_EXIT (which is customized for his library, and so not generally useful) expands to something like this:
const scope_guard_impl_base& guard = make_guard( ... ); guard.touch();
That's probably a better solution than using compiler dependant switches.
"Christopher Baus" <christopher@baus.net> wrote in message news:46995.12.146.21.162.1090521899.squirrel@mail.baus.net...
Then, in his version of ON_BLOCK_EXIT (which is customized for his library, and so not generally useful) expands to something like this:
const scope_guard_impl_base& guard = make_guard( ... ); guard.touch();
That's probably a better solution than using compiler dependant switches.
Yep. It should suppress warnings on other compilers too, and makes the code easier to understand. Jonathan
participants (2)
-
Christopher Baus -
David Abrahams -
drkm -
Jonathan Turkanis -
Stephen Jackson