aaron.ballman added a comment. In D131255#3702286 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131255#3702286>, @ShawnZhong wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply and the reference on the C standard! > > On the C++ side, Section C.1.8 specified that `int` bit-fields are signed: > >> Change: Bit-fields of type plain int are signed. >> Rationale: Leaving the choice of signedness to implementations could lead to >> inconsistent definitions of template specializations. For consistency, the >> implementation freedom was eliminated for non-dependent types, too. >> Effect on original feature: The choise is implementation-defined in C, but >> not so in C++. Agreed; I think that's falling out from https://eel.is/c++draft/class.bit#4.sentence-1 and https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.fundamental#1.sentence-1. > Implementation-wise, I'll see what I can find in CodeGen on whether `int` > bit-fields are signed for C Thanks! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131255/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131255 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
