Re: [PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82307

2017-10-18 Thread Mukesh Kapoor
On 10/9/2017 12:20 PM, Mukesh Kapoor wrote: Hi, This patch fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82307. For an unscoped enum with a fixed underlying type, the function type_promotes_to() does not always return the same type as the underlying type. The fix is to use the underlying

Re: [PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82307

2017-10-18 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 10/18/2017 12:17 PM, Mukesh Kapoor wrote: On 10/9/2017 12:20 PM, Mukesh Kapoor wrote: Hi, This patch fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82307. For an unscoped enum with a fixed underlying type, the function type_promotes_to() does not always return the same type as the unde

Re: [PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82307

2017-10-18 Thread Mukesh Kapoor
The bug happens only for enum types with a fixed underlying type. The existing code tries to create another type based on it's precision by calling c_common_type_for_size(). For the precision value of an unsigned long long type, the call to c_common_type_for_size() returns an unsigned long type

Re: [PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82307

2017-10-23 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, following up to a short off-line exchange with Nathan, I'm sending a reworked patch which - among other things - avoids regressing on the second testcase (cpp0x/enum36.C). Tested x86_64-linux. Thanks, Paolo. /cp 2017-10-23 Mukesh Kapoor Paolo Carlini

Re: [PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82307

2017-10-23 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 10/23/2017 09:15 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, following up to a short off-line exchange with Nathan, I'm sending a reworked patch which - among other things - avoids regressing on the second testcase (cpp0x/enum36.C). Tested x86_64-linux. ok, thanks! nathan -- Nathan Sidwell