From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id BB4F4386186E; Fri,  4 Dec 2020 15:03:15 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BB4F4386186E
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/98142] fstrict-enums optimization applied only for unscoped
 enums with unfixed underlying type
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:03:15 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-98142-4-ia6WY0IdzL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-98142-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-98142-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:03:15 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98142

--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Barry Revzin from comment #2)
> I guess in general this is kind of a scary optimization, since it doesn't
> seem like it's really a global thing? Perhaps this calls for an attribute?
>=20
> [[gnu::i_promise_on_penalty_of_ub_that_only_these_values_are_used]]
> enum class E : unsigned int { A, B, C, D };
>=20
> Or, you know, [[gnu::strict_enum]] or something.

It couldn't be called "strict_enum". The -fstrict-enums flag means assume no
invalid values, i.e. nothing outside the valid values of the enum type. For=
 any
enum type with a fixed underlying type, all values of the underlying type a=
re
valid values of the enum type, so there are no invalid values. So "strict_e=
num"
as the attribute name would be contradicting the meaning of -fstrict-enums.

So purely on that basis, the better name would be
"i_promise_on_penalty_of_ub_that_only_these_values_are_used"=