http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
--- Comment #10 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-10-11 02:34:39 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu Oct 11 02:34:32 2012
New Revision: 192347
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192347
Log:
2012-10-10 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
--- Comment #8 from James Dennett 2011-05-15
12:34:51 UTC ---
Interestingly this works with Apple's g++ 4.2.1, specifically
i686-apple-darwin10-g++-4.2.1 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5666) (dot 3), but
not with their 4.0.1 release.
Tested with:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
--- Comment #7 from James Dennett 2011-05-15
11:55:47 UTC ---
Unsurprisingly the quick hack isn't really good enough -- it'll happily bind a
non-const reference to a temporary initialized from a bitfield. (...and I
guess that's why we have tests
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43663
James Dennett changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||james.dennett at gmail dot
--- Comment #5 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-07 21:19 ---
Long-standing bug.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|4
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-06 11:38 ---
Noone's taking the address of a bitfield, the stnadard specifically says "The
address-of operator & shall not be applied to a bit-field, so there are no
pointers to bit-fields."
What happens is the same as:
double d =
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-06 10:57 ---
Confirmed. Note that the frontend would need to make sure to unfold the
reference for the middle-end - the middle-end can't bear taking the address
of a bitfield.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
