https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Sep 21 21:54:38 2019
New Revision: 276021
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276021&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/30277
* g++.dg/expr/bitfield14.C (struct S): Use si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Sep 16 04:34:28 2019
New Revision: 275746
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275746&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/30277 - int-width bit-field promotion.
Here, if cp_perform
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
nicbrown changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||contacts at buymore dot pro
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
--- Comment #4 from Tom Honermann ---
We recently got bit by this. It is still an issue in latest gcc trunk:
$ cat t.cpp
enum E : int {
e1 = 1
};
constexpr E operator-(E, E) {
return (E)99;
}
typedef struct {
E e;
E ebf : 16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #3 from s__nakayama at infoseek dot jp 2007-01-22 18:28 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I only have the C99 standard, and there I read in 6.3.1.1 p2 that only
> those variables are promoted to int that are of smaller size.
>
> Similarly, in 6.3.1.8, integer promotion rules ar
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2007-01-21 12:28 ---
Subject: Re: bit-field: wrong overload resolution
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, bangerth at dealii dot org wrote:
> I only have the C99 standard, and there I read in 6.3.1.1 p2 that only
> those variables are promoted to i
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-01-21 05:16 ---
I only have the C99 standard, and there I read in 6.3.1.1 p2 that only
those variables are promoted to int that are of smaller size.
Similarly, in 6.3.1.8, integer promotion rules are specified, and they
specify that ty
12 matches
Mail list logo
