--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-23 18:04
---
Subject: Bug 26534
Author: mmitchel
Date: Sun Apr 23 18:04:33 2006
New Revision: 113199
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=113199
Log:
2006-04-23 Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-23 03:16
---
Generating the explicit masking operations in the front end seems to be safe,
but suboptimal. The middle-end will not optimize code like:
struct A {int i : 3; };
struct A a;
int f() { return a.i 3; } //
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-19 17:11
---
In C++ the type of the FIELD_DECL should be unsigned int, not 4-bit unsigned
int. So, this is the usual problem that we don't quite know how lowered the
representation shared across the front-end and back-end
--- Comment #4 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-04-18 15:27 ---
And is the precision only encoded in FIELD_DECLs, for the C front-end as well?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26534
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-08 18:56 ---
*** Bug 27083 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-03 12:07 ---
The C frontend warns:
t.c: In function main:
t.c:9: warning: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type
and has in .gimple:
main ()
{
unnamed type D.1770;
int D.1771;
int D.1772;
struct X x;
