From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 950 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2005 18:31:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 874 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Sep 2005 18:31:24 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:31:24 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EIVqo-0002ti-Mj; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:31:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:31:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Robert Dewar Cc: Dave Korn , 'John Love-Jensen' , "'Gaurav Gautam, Noida'" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, 'MSX to GCC' Subject: Re: No effect of -fshort-enums..is it a bug Message-ID: <20050922183118.GA11115@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Robert Dewar , Dave Korn , 'John Love-Jensen' , "'Gaurav Gautam, Noida'" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, 'MSX to GCC' References: <4332E0DF.80500@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4332E0DF.80500@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00157.txt.bz2 On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 12:50:39PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote: > of course, but the behavior of a compiler with a special implementation > dependent switch is not specified by the standard! Switches can do any > amount of violence to the standard you like, the only requirement is > that there be a defined set of switches which gives standard defined > semantics. Except that the point I've been trying to make for the last day is that -fshort-enums does no damage to the standard. At least for C99. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC