On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:20:48AM -0700, Gerd Rausch wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On 24/05/2019 08.07, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:14:42PM -0700, Gerd Rausch wrote:
> >
> >> I can't say that I'm thrilled with this behavior though,
> >> as it appears error-prone:
> >> As soon as an enum value goes out of range for an "int", the
> >> type silently changes, potentially rendering structures and functions silently incompatible.
> >> It's quite the pitfall (e.g. the foo.c vs bar.c case above).
> >
> > Indeed, I would be very careful using this extension with
> > non-anonymous enums :)
> >
> > However, an anonymous enum can never have storage allocated, so it
> > doesn't experience any ABI concern.
> >
>
> Sure it can:
>
> % cat foo.c
> struct foo {
> enum { FOO = 1UL << 31 } foo;
> } foo = { FOO };
I meant top level anonymous enums :)
Jason
