From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8872 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2010 19:19:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 8854 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Sep 2010 19:19:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 19:19:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o81JIk8i027188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:18:47 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o81JIie4022273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:18:46 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o81JIiLa027567; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 21:18:44 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o81JIhwh027566; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 21:18:43 +0200 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 19:28:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker , Eli Zaretskii , Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t Message-ID: <20100901191843.GA27558@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100901183952.GE2986@adacore.com> <20100901185112.GC24300@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201009012007.55983.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201009012007.55983.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 21:07:55 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: > I wonder if switching on "-Wc++-compat" wouldn't catch these (at > least with recent enough gccs) and be more productive than > switching to a struct. /me ducks. I wanted to argue with this great point myself but during my tests (gcc-4.5) enum unfortunately IS compatible with int even in C++ (tried -Wall/-pedantic etc.). I haven't checked the C++ spec. enum a is not compatible with enum b in C++; while it is compatible in C. This does not help for the GDB case, though. Thanks, Jan