[PATCH] Workaround more _Bool problems on HP-UX

Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
Fri Jan 23 17:38:00 GMT 2004


 > *** c-decl.c	21 Jan 2004 10:32:05 -0000	1.472
 > --- c-decl.c	23 Jan 2004 06:42:03 -0000
 > *************** struct c_scope GTY(())
 > *** 230,250 ****
 > 
 >     /* True if we are currently filling this scope with parameter
 >        declarations.  */
 > !   bool parm_flag : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True if we already complained about forward parameter decls
 >        in this scope.  This prevents double warnings on
 >        foo (int a; int b; ...)  */
 > !   bool warned_forward_parm_decls : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True if this is the outermost block scope of a function body.
 >        This scope contains the parameters, the local variables
 >        declared
 >        in the outermost block, and all the labels (except those in
 >        nested functions, or declared at block scope with __label__).
 >        */
 > !   bool function_body : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True means make a BLOCK for this scope no matter what.  */
 > !   bool keep : 1;
 >   };
 > 
 >   /* The scope currently in effect.  */
 > --- 230,250 ----
 > 
 >     /* True if we are currently filling this scope with parameter
 >        declarations.  */
 > !   unsigned int parm_flag : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True if we already complained about forward parameter decls
 >        in this scope.  This prevents double warnings on
 >        foo (int a; int b; ...)  */
 > !   unsigned int warned_forward_parm_decls : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True if this is the outermost block scope of a function body.
 >        This scope contains the parameters, the local variables
 >        declared
 >        in the outermost block, and all the labels (except those in
 >        nested functions, or declared at block scope with __label__).
 >        */
 > !   unsigned int function_body : 1;
 > 
 >     /* True means make a BLOCK for this scope no matter what.  */
 > !   unsigned int keep : 1;
 >   };
 > 
 >   /* The scope currently in effect.  */


Roger - Your patch will increase the size of the struct.
Please consider using CHAR_BITFIELD instead.  

--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list