------- Comment #17 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2008-08-07 13:13 ------- (In reply to comment #16) > The expression cannot be very complicated because it needs to be a > INTEGER_CST.
Sure, but it can be of the form ~SOME_PREPROCESSOR_MACRO | (MACRO2 ^ MACRO3) What I meant to say is that the value of the expression may not be obvious to the author of the code. > On the other hand, I agree that it is best to give users as much information > as > reasonable. I think it is better if you comment in gcc-patches so reviewers > can > see your proposal. Will do next time, I guess for this time we're stuck here :-) > I would prefer to not repeat twice %T, though. Also, I think > users are going to have trouble to understand that the range of the enumeral > is > larger than the number of enumerators it contains. Perhaps we should print the > range of %T? > > "the result of %<static_cast%> is unspecified because %qE is outside the range > [%d,%d] of type %qT." That would be an excellent idea as well. Thanks Wolfgang -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12242
