On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 01:41:03PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > it is allowed if you do something like
> >
> > enum X : int;
> >
> > but it seems really pointless to support setting the size of something
> > when the language gives you a stand
On Feb 6, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> it is allowed if you do something like
>
> enum X : int;
>
> but it seems really pointless to support setting the size of something
> when the language gives you a standard way to do that.
Yes, it is, as long as you never use header files, an
On 06.02.2016 at 23:37 Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 08:36:27PM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jakub,
>>
>> as a follow-up for your c/69669 fix, I'd like to have the enum mode also
>> honored
>> in C++ code, because the mode attribute now finally really works in C, but
>
On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 08:36:27PM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> Hi Jakub,
>
> as a follow-up for your c/69669 fix, I'd like to have the enum mode also
> honored
> in C++ code, because the mode attribute now finally really works in C, but it
> is
> completely and silently(!) ignored by C++ c
On Feb 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> If that patch is not appropriate for stage 4
Without looking at the patch, fixes to abi incompatibilities I think are
important. Would be nice to fix them.
[ ok, I peeked at the patch ]
Wow, nice, short and sweet. I’d like for it to be co
Hi Jakub,
as a follow-up for your c/69669 fix, I'd like to have the enum mode also honored
in C++ code, because the mode attribute now finally really works in C, but it is
completely and silently(!) ignored by C++ code, which results in incompatible
code.
So I duplicated what is done in c/c-decl
