🚀 go-pugleaf

Lars Farm (lars.farm@nts.mh.se) wrote:
: 
: Experts explained that this is as it should be for const float, but not for
: const int (I know that the std does not talk about warnings). The point is:
: The experts seems to find some kind of conceptual difference between named
: constant floats and named constant ints, such that declaring const int K =
: L; in a header is considered good practice but const float X = Y; in a
: header is not and justifies a warning. I don't think there should be any
: such difference.

In fact, there is no such difference, as I understand it, in the way the
standard treats float and int in this regard.

Unused-variable warnings (a quality-of-implementation matter) are often
less than helpful, e.g., I get such a warning every time I acquire mutual
exclusion by creating an object whose constructor acquires the lock and
whose destructor releases it, since the object is not accessed elsewhere.

Tom Payne (thp@cs.ucr.edu)
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]