http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46806
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-05 04:18:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > > 8 is out of range of the enum. > > I agree. Unfortunately, with -O3, 8 is reported as in the range. if a program has undefined behaviour then you shouldn't expect consistent results at different optimisation levels ... but luckily for you gcc 4.6 is more forgiving of out-of-range enums
