On Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 15:25:55 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 7/31/12, monarch_dodra <monarchdo...@gmail.com> wrote:
The bug is only when the field is EXACTLY 32 bits BTW.
bitfields works quite nice with 33 or whatever. More details
in the report.
Yeah 32 or 64 bits, thanks for changing the title.
I wonder, is it really a bug? If you are going to have it fill a
whole size it would fit anyways, why even put it in as a
bitfield? You could just declare it separately.
I get the feeling it's not so much a bug as a design feature. If
you really needed a full size not aligned with whole bytes (or
padded appropriately) then I could understand, but still...
And I'm the one that changed the title name. Suddenly I'm
reminded of south park (movie) and the buttfor.
