From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 38C10384402B; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 01:08:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 38C10384402B
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/54319] [9/10/11/12 Regression] empty class causes error
 while non-empty does not
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 01:08:30 +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: 4.7.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 9.5
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cf_known_to_work
Message-ID: <bug-54319-4-9awm6LHNqh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-54319-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-54319-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 01:08:30 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D54319

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to work|                            |4.4.7

--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > Note even the following X causes an error:
> > struct X {int :1;};
> >=20
> > Maybe that will give a hint of where the bug is located.
>=20
> Which makes this a regression even :).
> The above with just one anonymous bitfield field is accepted until GCC 6.
>=20
> But this should give even more of what is the underlaying bug.

r6-7811 exposed the latent bug for the anonymous bitfield case (which is
expected).

The original testcase worked in 4.4.7 also.=