typeof and bitfields

[Paul Schlie]

> From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
> | Paul Schlie <schlie@comcast.net> writes:
> | So by implication would typedef struct { BF_3:3 } be required syntactically
> | to define a 3-bit (unspecifed) bit-field type which may then be used to
> | subsequently declare a named member: struct { BF_3 x; } ?
> 
> I think the issue of whether typedef unsigned :3 BF should be
> allowed is largely independent of typeof on bit-field.
> True there are various semantics to choose from and this is not
> mathematics; but chosing to spit an error seems to be the most
> annoyingly useless semantics.
> 
> -- Gaby

Agreed.