This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c: Bitfield fixes for PRs 3325, 3326
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:58:56 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: c: Bitfield fixes for PRs 3325, 3326
On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> 6.7.2.1/4:
>
> A bit-field shall have a type that is a qualified or
> unqualified version of _Bool, signed int, unsigned int, or
> some other implementation-defined type.
>
> seems to be encouraging implementation acceptance of other bit-field
> types. We have to document which ones are acceptable, but enums are
> fine.
C90 does not permit implementation-defined types here, so even if we
define some such types for C99 we must pedwarn for them outside C99 mode.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk