OpenE2K/gcc
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

re PR c/57773 (-Wpedantic incorrect warning for enum bit-field)

Browse Source 
PR c/57773
	* doc/implement-c.texi: Mention that other integer types are
	permitted as bit-field types in strictly conforming mode.
c/
	* c-decl.c (check_bitfield_type_and_width): Warn for implementation
	defined bit-field types only in ISO C.
testsuite/
	* gcc.dg/pr57773.c: New test.

From-SVN: r206373
This commit is contained in:
Marek Polacek 2014-01-06 18:53:01 +00:00 committed by Marek Polacek
parent aaa15a0d08
commit 96066ce19b
6 changed files with 34 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
gcc/ChangeLog
View File

@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
2014-01-06 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c/57773
* doc/implement-c.texi: Mention that other integer types are
permitted as bit-field types in strictly conforming mode.
2014-01-02 Felix Yang <fei.yang0953@gmail.com>
* modulo-sched.c (schedule_reg_moves): Clear distance1_uses if it

6
gcc/c/ChangeLog
View File

@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
2014-01-06 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c/57773
* c-decl.c (check_bitfield_type_and_width): Warn for implementation
defined bit-field types only in ISO C.
2014-01-02 Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>
Update copyright years

3
gcc/c/c-decl.c
View File

@ -4840,7 +4840,8 @@ check_bitfield_type_and_width (tree *type, tree *width, tree orig_name)
if (!in_system_header_at (input_location)
&& type_mv != integer_type_node
&& type_mv != unsigned_type_node
&& type_mv != boolean_type_node)
&& type_mv != boolean_type_node
&& !flag_isoc99)
pedwarn (input_location, OPT_Wpedantic,
"type of bit-field %qs is a GCC extension", name);

5
gcc/doc/implement-c.texi
View File

@ -479,9 +479,8 @@ by the @option{-funsigned-bitfields} option.
@cite{Allowable bit-field types other than @code{_Bool}, @code{signed int},
and @code{unsigned int} (C99 and C11 6.7.2.1).}
No other types are permitted in strictly conforming mode.
@c Would it be better to restrict the pedwarn for other types to C90
@c mode and document the other types for C99/C11 mode?
Other integer types, such as @code{long int}, and enumerated types are
permitted even in strictly conforming mode.
@item
@cite{Whether atomic types are permitted for bit-fields (C11 6.7.2.1).}

5
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
View File

@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
2014-01-06 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c/57773
* gcc.dg/pr57773.c: New test.
2014-01-06 Adam Butcher <adam@jessamine.co.uk>
PR c++/59635

13
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr57773.c Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-std=c99 -Wpedantic" } */
enum e { A };
struct { enum e b: 2; } s1;
struct { signed char b: 2; } s2;
struct { unsigned char b: 2; } s3;
struct { short b: 2; } s4;
struct { unsigned short b: 2; } s5;
struct { long int b: 2; } s6;
struct { unsigned long int b: 2; } s7;
struct { long long int b: 2; } s8;
struct { unsigned long long int b: 2; } s9;