[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: +Python 3.5 -Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2 ___ Python tracker __

[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 3aeca1fd4c0e by Victor Stinner in branch 'default': Issue #10310: Use "unsigned int field:1" instead of "signed int field:1" in a http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3aeca1fd4c0e -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Pyt

[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

Mark Lawrence added the comment: Could we have a patch review on this please. -- nosy: +BreamoreBoy ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-

[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

Changes by Antoine Pitrou : -- nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc stage: -> patch review versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.1 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

Changes by STINNER Victor : -- nosy: +haypo ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.

[issue10310] signed:1 bitfields rarely make sense

New submission from Hallvard B Furuseth : In Python 2.7 and 3.2a3, Modules/_io/textio.c uses signed:1 bitfields. They have value -1 or 0 in two's complement, but are not used thus here: gcc complains of = 1 overflow. If the point was that they are assigned signed values, well, unsigned:1 is pr