On Sun, 9 Nov 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> Hrmmm. In C, sp->a has type "3-bit unsigned integer" which is promoted to int
> by the integral promotions since all values are representable as int. sp->c
> has type "5-bit unsigned integer" which is likewise promoted to int. In C++,
> sp->a has t
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> I thought that the point at which integral promotions are applied would be a
> good place to catch this, as it excludes places where bit-fields are already
> being converted by assignment or explicit cast. I think we also want to
Formally of course t
On 11/09/2014 02:28 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
We had a request from a customer to add a warning to the C front end to
diagnose cases where bit-fields larger than an int are used in shift
expressions; confusingly, the operation is done in the precision of the
bit-field size rather than its de
> We had a request from a customer to add a warning to the C front end to
> diagnose cases where bit-fields larger than an int are used in shift
> expressions; confusingly, the operation is done in the precision of the
> bit-field size rather than its declared type. This is a symptom of a larger
>
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
+ warning_at (EXPR_LOCATION (exp), OPT_Wbitfield_conversion,
+ "suggest casting bit-field to its declared type");
I think it would be nice to print this declared type. It can be done
directly in this message, or by adding a not
We had a request from a customer to add a warning to the C front end to
diagnose cases where bit-fields larger than an int are used in shift
expressions; confusingly, the operation is done in the precision of the
bit-field size rather than its declared type. This is a symptom of a
larger probl
