https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98142
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > Perhaps spell it as gnu::exhaustive_enum then or something similar? I like that. It would be much stricter than -fstrict-enums as it would say that you won't create E2(1) or E2(3) even though those are valid values.
