https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Ian McInerney changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian.s.mcinerney at ieee dot org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Sergey Semushin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Predelnik at gmail dot com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
A better example:
typedef unsigned char foo;
enum class myenum
{
foo,
bar = (foo)-1
};
Is the value -1L or 255?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #3)
But the global foo is a type while myenum::foo is not a type. Is there any
context where they can be used interchangeably?
enum
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A better example:
typedef unsigned char foo;
enum class myenum
{
foo,
bar = (foo)-1
};
Is the value -1L or 255?
If I rename myenum::foo to myenum::Foo the code silently
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It also changes meaning if I reorder the declarations of myenum::foo and
myenum::bar, which is exactly the sort of fragile code that deserves a warning.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Philipp s...@s-e-f-i.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com
---
