------- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 15:31 -------
The inconsistency between the two ILs arise because in default_conversion
we convert (const long : 33) to (long : 33) via perform_integral_promotions
and then is_bitfield_expr_with_lowered_type no longer recognizes the expression
as to-be promoted bitfield and thus convert_bitfield_to_declared_type does
not do the conversion anymore.
And indeed, is_bitfield_expr_with_lowered_type misses handling for
such conversions.
Mine.
(I still think promotion should be according to integer promotions of
bitfields, not according to the declared type)
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2008-01-08 23:19:38 |2008-01-14 15:31:56
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33819
