[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       boost
Subject:    Re: [boost] [1.34.0beta] many, many warnings... :(
From:       David Abrahams <dave () boost-consulting ! com>
Date:       2007-05-06 1:50:27
Message-ID: 87k5vm67q4.fsf () valverde ! peloton
[Download RAW message or body]


on Sat May 05 2007, "Jonathan Franklin" <franklin.jonathan-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

> AFAICT gcc will only gripe if the base class defines virtual methods but no
> virtual dtor.  Perhaps this isn't the case with older versions of the
> compiler.
>
> I still need to read up on the issues WRT is_polymorphic, since they
> obviously exist given David's previous statements.

Oh, maybe not.  I don't remember the precise issue.  However, it's
easy to imagine that that particular warning could have been defined
differently.  My point is that most warnings aren't hard errors for a
reason: there are legitimate use cases for the code being warned
about.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]