Re: ia64 linux doesn't bootstrap

[Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 03:25:17PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Friday, October 18, 2002 04:02:53 PM -0400 David Edelsohn 
> <dje@watson.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > 	Tighten your seatbelt, the AIX failure is another case where the C
> > and C++ front-ends are not consistent with respect to the state of a DECL
> > after warnings.  I am not sure which one is right.
> >
> > 	The testcase in g++.dg/break/bitfield7_y.C creates a bitfield that
> > is too wide:
> >
> > union U {
> >   int i: 4096;
> > };
> 
> The key point is that this is valid C++, but not valid C.
> 
> So, C++ needs to handle it (somehow) and C does not.
> 
> The way the C++ front end tries to handle this is like this.  Suppose
> that your widest integer type has 64 bits.  Then, G++ presents "i" as
> a 64-bit bit-field to the back end.  Then, it creates some extra
> space as an unnamed giant bit field.
> 
> I suspect we are running into problems with the unnamed giant field.
> 
> But, nobody should every be trying to read or write those bits.  Why
> is that happenning?
> 
> Anyhow, what is the triplet for the target?  If I run bitfield7.C on
> that target's cc1plus I take it I will see the failure?

This is the new test g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7_main.C, when the
file bitfield7_y.C is compiled.  I think you'll see the failure with
powerpc-eabisim or powerpc-unknown-linux.gnu.

Janis