Re: Clarification required about bitfields

2015-12-23 Thread Joseph Myers
See the WG14 reflector thread starting with , and the reference back to the analysis of the textual history in . Effectively, you can treat choices in this area as being implementation-defined or unspec

Re: Clarification required about bitfields

2015-12-23 Thread Richard Biener
On December 23, 2015 9:28:32 AM GMT+01:00, Konstantin Vladimirov wrote: >Hi, > >Now LLVM and GCC essentially disagrees on simple test (minimized from >one of dejagnu tests): > >#include > >struct s { > unsigned long long u33: 33; > unsigned long long u40: 40; > unsigned long long u41: 41; >};

Clarification required about bitfields

2015-12-23 Thread Konstantin Vladimirov
Hi, Now LLVM and GCC essentially disagrees on simple test (minimized from one of dejagnu tests): #include struct s { unsigned long long u33: 33; unsigned long long u40: 40; unsigned long long u41: 41; }; struct s a = { 0x10, 0x10, 0x10 }; int main (void) { if (a.u33 * a.u3