https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111056
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alex Henrie from comment #3)
> I imagine that it would be difficult to change GCC's behavior to match
> Clang's in this case.
Except GCC does not warn at -O1 and above (there are a few other b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111056
--- Comment #3 from Alex Henrie ---
By the way, thanks for pointing out that using constexpr suppresses the warning
on GCC. Although Clang does not support constexpr in C yet, it is interesting
that Clang is smart enough to not warn about a plai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111056
Alex Henrie changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111056
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
We don't warn for the same reason as we don't warn for `constexpr` because the
value is known at compile time.
That is:
```
#include
int main()
{
signed int a = 1;
enum : signed int { b = 1 }d = b;
