------- Comment #12 from gpiez at web dot de 2010-06-12 08:46 ------- I am closing this, as it isn't a gcc bug, as it behaves according to the standard.
The bug is in the standard, as it mandates f<1,1> // ok f<CHAR_MAX, CHAR_MAX>() // error g<INT_MAX, INT_MAX>() // no error, but undefined behaviuour f(char, char) // error g(int, int) // ok which is inconsistent and surprising. C++0x should really have got rid of the implicit integer promotion. Wasn't the intent of the implicit promotion to be able to write char a,b,c,d; a = b*c/d; and get a correct result even if b*c > CHAR_MAX? I believe nobody does write code like this anymore, and even if, you could simply say "undefined behaviour" ;-) It doesn't work for ints anyway. Instead I have now an implicit integer promotion which forces me to use an explicit cast in compound initializers, where narrowing conversion isn't allowed, while in a simple assignment of course it is allowed (or else a hell would break loose... ). Why not make -Wconversion an error, at least this would be consistent ;-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44500
