This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsupressable enum comparison warning
- From: "jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 02:25:26 +0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsupressable enum comparison warning
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-53524-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53524
Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-30 02:25:26 UTC ---
I think Paul's arguing that you shouldn't warn on "test ? anon_enum_1 :
anon_enum_2". The result is defined by [expr.cond]p6 to be the common type of
the two enum types (often 'int'), and if the pattern is widely used, then it's
probably not a good idea to warn about it by default.
And, of course, it's always a bad idea to have a warning that users can't turn
off.
I haven't investigated what types PT1BitsAv and PT2BitsAv are supposed to have
before the enum is closed, but if they're the same as their initializers, then
the above argument holds.