From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19596 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2007 15:42:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 19547 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2007 15:42:46 -0000 Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070623154246.19546.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug middle-end/31541] [4.3 Regression] cannot take address of bit field In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rguenther at suse dot de" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg02128.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de 2007-06-23 15:42 ------- Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] cannot take address of bit field On Sat, 23 Jun 2007, malitzke at metronets dot com wrote: > Question is it the policy of the gcc community to render all 32-bit machines > obsolete for later versions of gcc-4.{3-9}.x? just like certain C constructs > are first marked as disparaged and subsequently rendered unacceptable. No, what get's you to this thought? Richard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31541