defcenum with non-integer base-type

[Luís Oliveira]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Attila Lendvai <attila at lendvai.name> wrote:
> some projects out in the wild use DEFCENUM with e.g. :DOUBLE
> base-type. this is not in adherence with the C standard (only integer
> types are valid enum types, and it's at least int sized). my
> refactoring of enums introduced an explicit check for this, and it
> broke some projects in ql. to alleviate that i've commented out this
> new check in master.
>
> the question:
>
> should we roll with this? does anyone see any problems or potentially
> surprising behavior? e.g. with the semantics of the enum increments
> and the double base type? or something else?

It sounds a bit silly at first, but from CFFI's point of view, a
DEFCENUM is really just a mapping between symbols and... something
else.

What would we gain from being a bit more draconian about the base type?

-- 
Luís Oliveira
http://kerno.org/~luis/