Re: Further news on Clang - spurious warnings

On 3 August 2011 10:34, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> The check is only tautological if the compiler implements enums as unsigned
> integers. Whether enums are signed or not is implementation-dependent.
> Perhaps cast status to unsigned or signed explicitly before the checks?

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.

This warning is only seen because the first enum literal in the enum
is explicitly given the value 0, thus precluding the possibility of
the value being < 0, barring some abuse of the enum.

--
Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services