https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94631
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > (In reply to Rich Felker from comment #2) > > So basically the outcome of DR120 was allowing the GCC behavior? It still > > seems like a bad thing, not required, and likely to produce exploitable bugs > > (due to truncation of arithmetic) as well as very poor-performance code (due > > to constant masking). > > Note this only matters when the size of the bit-field is less than the size > of int. bigger than the size of int (due to default integer promotions still applying).
