This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: g++ 2.96 -W issues bogus warning for conditional expression with enum and unsigned
- To: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Subject: Re: g++ 2.96 -W issues bogus warning for conditional expression with enum and unsigned
- From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 09:44:10 +0100
- CC: sebor at roguewave dot com, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, nathan <nathan at acm dot org>
- Organization: Codesourcery LLC
- References: <3962C10C.5DF7D614@roguewave.com> <200007060706.JAA01433@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de>
"Martin v. Loewis" wrote:
> so maybe Nathan can comment about the exact rationale for this
What I wrote about that is available at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/1999-08n/msg00843.html
(summary: they ware existing warnings which had been rendered impotent
by changes elsewhere).
I happen to think them sensible (maybe the wording could be
changed to make it clear what is happening).
However, looking at Martin Sebor's example, the enumeration should be
unsigned, so the warning should not be triggered -- I'll take a look.
> warning, and point to the exact place in the documentation where this
> warning is documented.
Documentation? You want documentation? There's no section in gcc.texi
describing the rationale for particular warnings, perhaps there should
be.
nathan
--
Dr Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
'But that's a lie.' - 'Yes it is. What's your point?'
nathan@codesourcery.com : http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ : nathan@acm.org