From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6274 invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2004 15:26:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6267 invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2004 15:26:26 -0000 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040831152626.6265.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040824155045.17170.terra@gnome.org> References: <20040824155045.17170.terra@gnome.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/17170] -Wdefault-bitfield-sign X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg03275.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk 2004-08-31 15:26 ------- Subject: Re: -Wdefault-bitfield-sign On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, terra at gnome dot org wrote: > Warnings go where they are likely to discover problems. This is one such problem > area, notable the signed:1 case. And the noise from misfires is going to be > minimal. We do warn for assigning a constant 1 to a signed 1-bit bit-field (in 3.5). But this suggested warning does make sense for code portability; not all 1-bit fields necessarily get constant 1 assigned to them. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17170