[Boost-users] warning C4180 in VS 2005 for bind.hpp

From: Adam Badura (abadura_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-29 08:29:08

    I have a large project at work. We use Visual Studio 2005 with SP 1 and 
Boost 1.34.0.
    When we use boost::bind in algorithms on collections we very often get 
following warning (at level 3):

J:\ThirdParty\boost_1_34_0\boost/bind.hpp(1575) : warning C4180: qualifier 
applied to function type has no meaning; ignored

the detailed message is following (just an example extract from compilation 
log, sadly I was unable to produce a simple stand-alone example - but if it 
is required then I will give some more work into finding one):

J:\ThirdParty\boost_1_34_0\boost/bind.hpp(1575) : warning C4180: qualifier 
applied to function type has no meaning; ignored
        J:\ThirdParty\boost_1_34_0\boost/bind.hpp(1609) : see reference to 
class template instantiation 'boost::_bi::add_cref<Pm,I>' being compiled
        with
        [
            Pm=boost::shared_ptr<nle::views::ScrollEventListener> ,
            I=1
        ]
        j:\sources\Common/Helpers/Observable.h(128) : see reference to class 
template instantiation 'boost::_bi::dm_result<Pm,A1>' being compiled
        with
        [
            Pm=boost::shared_ptr<nle::views::ScrollEventListener> 
(__thiscall boost::weak_ptr<nle::views::ScrollEventListener>::* )(void),
            A1=boost::arg<1>
        ]
        j:\sources\Common/Helpers/Observable.h(120) : while compiling class 
template member function 'void 
common::helpers::Observable<T>::registerListener(const boost::weak_ptr<T> &) 
const'
        with
        [
            T=nle::views::ScrollEventListener
        ]
        j:\sources\NLE/Views/ScrollInfo.h(65) : see reference to class 
template instantiation 'common::helpers::Observable<T>' being compiled
        with
        [
            T=nle::views::ScrollEventListener
        ]

    One of my colleagues found a "solution" to this problem. If the modifier 
"const" is removed in one of typedef's the no warning are generated. However 
we would like a better solution since modifying the library doesn't seem a 
good one.
    What to do?

    Adam Badura