From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-help-return-21533-listarch-gcc-help=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7140 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2005 16:28:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6334 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Sep 2005 16:27:48 -0000
Received: from exprod6og7.obsmtp.com (HELO psmtp.com) (64.18.1.127)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with SMTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:27:48 +0000
Received: from source ([192.150.20.142]) by exprod6ob7.obsmtp.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP;
	Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:27:39 PDT
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51])
	by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8MGXlTK029550;
	Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:33:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fe2.corp.adobe.com (fe2.corp.adobe.com [10.8.192.72])
	by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8MGRZn2022188;
	Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from namail3.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.192.66]) by fe2.corp.adobe.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
	 Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:27:35 -0700
Received: from 10.32.16.88 ([10.32.16.88]) by namail3.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.192.66]) via Exchange Front-End Server namailhost.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.192.72]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ;
 Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:27:35 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:28:00 -0000
Subject: Re: No effect of -fshort-enums..is it a bug
From: John Love-Jensen <eljay@adobe.com>
To: "'Gaurav Gautam, Noida'" <gauravga@noida.hcltech.com>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
        MSX to GCC <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Message-ID: <BF584543.1F89%eljay@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: <SERRANOevWWGxegIqun000001d8@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2

Hi Dave, Daniel, and Gaurav,

For C99, I stand corrected.

For C89 or C++98, I think my statement is applicable.  (But until I
double-check by reading those standards, take that with a grain of salt.)

For all three, having enum be an int (signed or unsigned) is legit of
course.

For all three, having enum be a long is (at best) a compiler extension, at
worst (-pedantic ?) not supported.  If I'm reading the specs correctly.
NOTE:  not germane to Gaurav's question, just talking out loud.

Sincerely,
--Eljay