[Bug d/117832] Use CONSTRUCTOR_ZERO_PADDING_BITS in the D FE

2025-04-09 Thread ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117832 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug d/117832] Use CONSTRUCTOR_ZERO_PADDING_BITS in the D FE

2025-04-09 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117832 --- Comment #3 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3e3b665cc77791f2e088aeee124d8a9fb7f6eb41 commit r15-9333-g3e3b665cc77791f2e088aeee124d8a9fb7f6eb41 Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Wed A

[Bug d/117832] Use CONSTRUCTOR_ZERO_PADDING_BITS in the D FE

2025-03-23 Thread ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117832 --- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw --- Gave a little test of this flag. Doesn't look like it will be able to replace all the uses where `memset(0)` is currently generated in the D front-end. It probably doesn't harm to have both this and `-ftrivia

[Bug d/117832] Use CONSTRUCTOR_ZERO_PADDING_BITS in the D FE

2025-01-13 Thread ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117832 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1