🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1421@sdrc.UUCP> gcglan@sdrc.UUCP (Frank Glandorf) writes:
>	a=CIRCLE;
>%CC-W-ENUMCLASH, Mismatched enum type in "=" operation.
     ^
I presume from this codeletter that the implementation did not in fact
terminate the compilation as a result of the mismatch.

>I think this should be ok because according to section 3.5.2.2...
>"The identifiers in an  enumerator list are delcared as
>constants that have type int and may appear  wherever such are
>permitted." 

2.1.1.3 footnote 6: "Of course, an implementation is free to produce any
number of [warning] diagnostics".  A.5 common warnings: "A value is given to
an object of enumeration type other than by assignment of [something of the
same enumeration type]."

In diagnosing violations of the strong-enum model, the implementation is
(a) legally in the right (as long as it is only a warning) and also (b)
morally in the right (as long as there is an option to disable the warning).

Clause (a) is a fact.  (b) is my opinion, and I stand by it even though the
example in A.5 involves a copy in the direction opposite that of the posted
code fragment.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@ima.ima.isc.com or harvard!ima!karl), The Walking Lint