Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Non-Portable pointer assignment?
Message-ID: <16359@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 8 Jun 91 03:37:43 GMT
References: <MCDANIEL.91Jun6111329@dolphin.adi.com> <1991Jun7.013605.728@tkou02.enet.dec.com> <1991Jun7.161752.9625@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 10

In article <1991Jun7.161752.9625@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
-It's worse than that.  Recently it was pointed out that a named enumeration
-type is in scope as soon as its name is seen, and since there is no provision
-for incomplete enumerated types, that means that `sizeof(enumtype)' is legal
-before the members have been seen... so the size of the type cannot depend
-on the values of the members!!  (In X3J11's defence, this probably was not
-deliberate.)

I'm not sure X3J11 would agree with the above interpretation.
If anybody really cares about this, they should request a formal ruling on it.