Pavol Droba said:
> I have noticed a lot of new warnings in the release 1.30.
> I absuletely agree, that there is no reason to do some kind of "line by
> line" pragma suppression.
>
> But...
>
> Most of the new warnings can be easily removed with a static_cast. I
> don't understand, why any boost
On Wednesday 30 April 2003 06:30 am, Pavol Droba wrote:
> Most of the new warnings can be easily removed with a static_cast. I don't
> understand, why any boost lib have to generate such a warnings.
I agree that it would be great from the user's point of view if all of Boost
compiled without war
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 10:24:09AM +0100, Ken Hagan wrote:
> > William E. Kempf wrote...
> >> pragmas. As a "best practice suggestion", it's a great idea... as a
> >> requirement, I'd have to voice an opinion against.
>
> Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> >
> > I absolutely agree, but I feel it would be u
> William E. Kempf wrote...
>> pragmas. As a "best practice suggestion", it's a great idea... as a
>> requirement, I'd have to voice an opinion against.
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>
> I absolutely agree, but I feel it would be useful encourage authors
> to try.
Playing devil's advocate, but why?
Wi