From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-393252-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10406 invoked by alias); 30 May 2012 16:29:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 10393 invoked by uid 22791); 30 May 2012 16:29:24 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 May 2012 16:29:09 +0000
From: "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/53524] [4.7/4.8 Regression] Bogus and unsuppressible enum comparison warning
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 16:45:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: manu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.1
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-53524-4-O6Wlq9yKwT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53524-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53524-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg02870.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D53524

--- Comment #8 from Manuel L=C3=B3pez-Ib=C3=A1=C3=B1ez <manu at gcc dot gnu=
.org> 2012-05-30 16:29:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The warnings are an unintended effect of my fix for PR16603.

So, before your fix, same_type_p was returning true?=20

enum { e1 =3D -1 };
enum { e2 =3D -1 };

int j;
void foo(void) {
  j =3D 0 ? e1 : e2;
}

g++ 4.3.2
tt.cc:6: warning: enumeral mismatch in conditional expression: =E2=80=98<an=
onymous
enum>=E2=80=99 vs =E2=80=98<anonymous enum>=E2=80=99

So, the warning is intended, and the fact that we did not warn before was a
bug. However, it is not clear to me how this code can be dangerous. But the
warning is very very old.

r29056 | nathan | 1999-09-02 11:21:42 +0200 (Thu, 02 Sep 1999) | 4 lines

        * call.c (build_conditional_expr): Warn on enum mismatches.
        (convert_arg_to_ellipsis): Move non-pod check to after
        conversion.