| From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Further news on Clang - spurious warnings |
| Date: | 2011-08-04 01:21:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20110804012117.GA11779@fetter.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:40:42PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 03.08.2011 13:05, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >I don't believe that the standard allows for an implementation of
> >enums as unsigned integers - after all, individual enum literals can
> >be given corresponding negative integer values.
>
> C99 says:
>
> >Each enumerated type shall be compatible with char, a signed integer type, or an
> >unsigned integer type. The choice of type is implementation-defined,110) but shall be
> >capable of representing the values of all the members of the enumeration.
Are we moving to C99?
C89 says:
Each enumerated type shall be compatible with an integer type; the
choice of type is implementation-defined.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-08-04 01:32:21 | Re: Compressing the AFTER TRIGGER queue |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-08-04 01:17:21 | Re: Compressing the AFTER TRIGGER queue |