On 2/5/26 1:53 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 08:06:18PM +0900, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 2/4/26 6:11 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Bootstrapped/regtested on ppc64le-pc-linux-gnu, ok for 17.0?

-- >8 --
This implements [class.bit]/2: An unnamed bit-field shall not be
declared with a cv-qualified type.  This was clarified in DR 2229.

        DR 2229
        PR c++/123935

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

        * decl2.cc (grokbitfield): Disallow cv-qualified unnamed bit-fields.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C: New test.
---
   gcc/cp/decl2.cc                   |  9 +++++++++
   gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C | 12 ++++++++++++
   2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
   create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl2.cc b/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
index 20ee662eea2..eb2294fffd0 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
@@ -1635,6 +1635,15 @@ grokbitfield (const cp_declarator *declarator,
         return NULL_TREE;
       }
+  /* [class.bit]/2 "An unnamed bit-field shall not be declared with
+     a cv-qualified type."  */
+  if (!DECL_NAME (value) && TYPE_QUALS (type) != TYPE_UNQUALIFIED)
+    {
+      error_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (value),

This seems like a pedwarn rather than an error.

+               "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified");
+      return NULL_TREE;

...and then continue.

clang++ gives an error, but any diagnostic will do.  Thus:

dg.exp passed on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.

OK, thanks.

-- >8 --
This implements [class.bit]/2: An unnamed bit-field shall not be
declared with a cv-qualified type.  This was clarified in DR 2229.

        DR 2229
        PR c++/123935

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

        * decl2.cc (grokbitfield): Add pedwarn for cv-qualified unnamed
        bit-fields.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C: New test.
---
  gcc/cp/decl2.cc                   |  6 ++++++
  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl2.cc b/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
index 20ee662eea2..694c23d851e 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
@@ -1635,6 +1635,12 @@ grokbitfield (const cp_declarator *declarator,
        return NULL_TREE;
      }
+ /* [class.bit]/2 "An unnamed bit-field shall not be declared with
+     a cv-qualified type."  */
+  if (!DECL_NAME (value) && TYPE_QUALS (type) != TYPE_UNQUALIFIED)
+    pedwarn (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (value), 0,
+            "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified");
+
    int flags = LOOKUP_IMPLICIT;
    if (init && DIRECT_LIST_INIT_P (init))
      flags = LOOKUP_NORMAL;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..a55604bf8a9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/DRs/dr2229.C
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+// DR 2229, Volatile unnamed bit-fields
+// PR c++/123935
+
+typedef const unsigned cu;
+typedef volatile unsigned vu;
+typedef const volatile unsigned cvu;
+
+struct S {
+  const unsigned : 1; // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified" 
}
+  volatile unsigned : 1; // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be 
cv-qualified" }
+  const volatile unsigned : 1; // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be 
cv-qualified" }
+  unsigned : 1;
+  const unsigned i1 : 1;
+  volatile unsigned i2 : 1;
+  const volatile unsigned i3 : 1;
+
+  cu : 1;   // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified" }
+  vu : 1;   // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified" }
+  cvu : 1;  // { dg-error "unnamed bit-field cannot be cv-qualified" }
+  cu i4: 1;
+  vu i5 : 1;
+  cvu i6 : 1;
+};

base-commit: f6838e731633d8b5b11f15ce3e227e18df2fe46e

Reply via email to