On Thursday 22 September 2005 19:31, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 12:50:39PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote: > > of course, but the behavior of a compiler with a special implementation > > dependent switch is not specified by the standard! Switches can do any > > amount of violence to the standard you like, the only requirement is > > that there be a defined set of switches which gives standard defined > > semantics. > > Except that the point I've been trying to make for the last day is that > -fshort-enums does no damage to the standard. At least for C99. It's also worth noting that -fshort-enums is the default on some targets, as required by the platform ABI. Paul
