-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Daniela Engert via Boost Sent: 24 November 2018 17:32 To: Boost Developers Cc: Daniela Engert Subject: Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?
<snip>
This is what bothers me most about the idea that all warnings must be addressed in Boost libraries.
In most cases, I simply turn off compiler warnings by a #pragma after I convinced myself that "everything is fine, nothing to see here, get along". The simple fact that someone has audited warnings, acted accordingly, and then documented this - may be by just suppressing them in the source code - is an indicator of due diligence.
+1 I agree that supressing is the right thing to do, preferably with a comment justifying why.
Therefore while warnings should be heeded I do not think it is possible in practical use to fix all warnings for all compiler implementations without making code even more obfuscated and more confusing than it normally is. It is an ideal to fix all warnings but it is not a realistic goal in quite a number of situations.
And one can ensure that all (recent and decent fine-grained warning control) compilers will not issue any warnings, which keeps the novices unconfused by a load of warnings, and most important, lawyers and pedants quiet too. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830