https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63359
--- Comment #9 from James Molloy <james.molloy at arm dot com> --- OK, given your second example I agree that the usecase isn't quite as pathological as I thought. > I'm not saying I'll never accept a warning for this sort of code; but I'd need convincing that it won't unduly pessimize real code with no acceptable work-arounds. Clang is committed to this warning as our community feels the error detection rate makes up for the lack of raw power. So unless we actively do something the two compilers will always differ in approach which probably isn't best for our users. Would you be opposed to discussing a constraint modifier to mean "implicitly extend to 64-bits"?
