--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-04-23 22:22 ---
Subject: Re: Bit-field promotions
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> However, my patch was not intended to fix this bug, and only does so by
> accident. In particular, the last lines o
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-23 22:13
---
I agree that the C++ standard requires the behavior suggested by Joseph in
Comment #1.
However, my patch was not intended to fix this bug, and only does so by
accident. In particular, the last lines of decay_con
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-23 20:24 ---
I just checked and this was fixed by:
2006-04-23 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c++/26534
* cp-tree.h (is_bitfield_expr_with_lowered_type): New function.
* typeck.c (is_bitfield_expr_
