https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Jul 22 15:40:51 2016
New Revision: 238651
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238651=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/71560 - union compound literal initializes wrong union field
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg00069.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> Please let me know if you're planning to make these
> changes, otherwise I can give it a whirl.
Unfortunately I don't have time for this. Please go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to vries from comment #3)
That would make sense. Please let me know if you're planning to make these
changes, otherwise I can give it a whirl.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> 99) Note that this differs from a cast expression. For example, a cast
> specifies a conversion to scalar types or void only, and the result of a
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71560
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |documentation
--- Comment #1
