This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] Use unsigned as base type for some enums

From: Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 15:07:16 -0600
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] Use unsigned as base type for some enums
References: <20181002044420.17628-1-tom@tromey.com> <20181002044420.17628-4-tom@tromey.com> <8037ff67-25db-de97-f64c-8f9b24f38778@redhat.com>

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

Pedro> This LGTM, except a nit.  During the discussion around v1, the conclusion
Pedro> was that we can't add the assertion to the class, but adding it to
Pedro> operator~ would work.  That information is lost on whoever ends up reading
Pedro> this code later on.  Could you add a comment?  Or if you prefer, update the
Pedro> commit log to mention it?

I've added a comment.

Tom

References:
- [PATCH v2 00/10] Undefined Behavior Sanitizer, this time with docs
  - From: Tom Tromey
- [PATCH v2 03/10] Use unsigned as base type for some enums
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] Use unsigned as base type for some enums
  - From: Pedro Alves

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]