From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 953B83844754; Sat, 4 May 2024 02:09:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 953B83844754 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1714788593; bh=ESJncfC6ljwJr19QxvwTUabhURLAKziSuEznTI4FpI8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=mg3T3/eEeSMWKg4VTPFvB6TdqKJ8DoSjwu+OhUjIt98js9t8c2RvHVYmds3hv9yQ3 +RIppLevyZz5hqzVZSHcMM9Gvyzcx3tLdudfMIuMZSHePTZFJehOZT58aqMkVsWW4p gJIywToM5072xHywN3pfUq3wp8ZhTVVz9gBXPs5Y= From: "egallager at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/114928] #pragma packed(push,1) should give the same warning as __attribute__((packed)) Date: Sat, 04 May 2024 02:09:52 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.2.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc see_also Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D114928 Eric Gallager changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |egallager at gcc dot gnu.o= rg See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill | |a/show_bug.cgi?id=3D60972 --- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager --- There are a number of other bugs open regarding inconsistencies between #pr= agma pack and __attribute__((packed)); see for instance bug 60972 and related bu= gs (not sure if this is a dup or even fully related, but it's at least worth putting under "See Also"...)=