https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Aleksandr Slobodeniuk from comment #0)
> What's funny is that I didn't find any compiler, that could compile it.
That usually means it's not a bug then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Aleksandr Slobodeniuk from comment #3)
> Fields of const-qualified structs and unions, that were initialized with
> const literals ARE *constant expressions*, isn't it?
No. See 6.6 p6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
--- Comment #4 from Aleksandr Slobodeniuk ---
> Fields of const-qualified structs and unions, that were initialized with
> const literals ARE *constant expressions*, isn't it?
Maybe that's the answer:
C11 standard.
6.6 Constant expressions.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
--- Comment #3 from Aleksandr Slobodeniuk ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> it has to be a constant literal.
Sorry, I didn't really specify the standard (and mess c with c++).
C11 standard.
6.8.4.2 The switch statement.
> 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
--- Comment #2 from Aleksandr Slobodeniuk ---
Sorry, I didn't really specify the standard (and mess c with c++).
C11 standard.
6.8.4.2 The switch statement.
> 3 The expression of each case label shall be an integer constant expression
> and no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81845
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
