Hi, >> What I would suggest is to have a -fgnu-strict-volatile-bit-fields > > Why a new option? The -fstrict-volatile-bitfields option is already > GCC-specific, and I think it can do what you want anyway.
As I understand Richard's comment, he proposes to have an option for true AAPCS compliance, which will be allowed to break the C++11 memory model and which will _not_ be the default on any target. Name it -fstrict-volatile-bitfields. And an option that addresses your requirements, which will _not_ break the C++11 memory model and which will be the default on some targets, dependent on the respective ABI requirements. Name it -fgnu-strict-volatile-bit-fields. Bernd.
