From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 107641 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2017 22:04:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 107626 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jun 2017 22:04:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:04:11 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8593A85541; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:04:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 8593A85541 Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=law@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 8593A85541 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-117-103.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.117.103]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103137C142; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [ping * 2] PR78736: New C warning -Wenum-conversion To: Prathamesh Kulkarni , gcc Patches , "Joseph S. Myers" , Marek Polacek References: From: Jeff Law Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:04:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg02336.txt.bz2 On 05/23/2017 07:54 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > I would like to ping this patch for review: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg00775.html So was there any kind of resolution on the case in libcomp where we had an assignment between two essentially equivalent, but distinct enums? Aren't we going to trip over that if this is in -Wall? And if so and we wanted to keep this in -Wall, then don't we need a cast here? Jeff