From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-09-26 08:22:28
--- In boost_at_y..., Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_a...> wrote:
> At 10:06 AM 9/25/2001, williamkempf_at_h... wrote:
>
> >> typedef void ignore_unused_variable;
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >
> >Effectively no different then the proposed definition. I don't
care
> >how it's implemented, I'm asking if we want the functionality
added
> >to config or some other header for general use by Boost
developers.
>
> Not boost/config.hpp. This isn't a configuration tool. More
likely
> boost/utility.hpp.
>
> But jump back a bit. I missed something. What is wrong with the
> traditional style of coding for unused parameters, and variables?
>
> void foo ( MyClass const& /*c*/ )
> {
> // int a ;
> // float b ;
> }
>
> Is the issue that a and b are in fact use in some control paths,
and so
> can't just be commented out (or outright removed), yet the compiler
is
> warning because they aren't used in all control paths?
No, it's just a "problem" with self documentation. I just don't
think the above idiom explains what's going on in the code.
Bill Kempf