diff options
| author | Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> | 2014-01-06 18:53:01 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Marek Polacek <mpolacek@gcc.gnu.org> | 2014-01-06 18:53:01 +0000 |
| commit | 96066ce19be4b8187ac2c1a45a55986bf2655697 (patch) | |
| tree | d1e15bd8204f3a756aa9a12600b3781957a80f71 /gcc/doc/implement-c.texi | |
| parent | aaa15a0d0823654d69cb9d4d751a0ecf3ed6ee49 (diff) | |
| download | gcc-96066ce19be4b8187ac2c1a45a55986bf2655697.zip gcc-96066ce19be4b8187ac2c1a45a55986bf2655697.tar.gz gcc-96066ce19be4b8187ac2c1a45a55986bf2655697.tar.bz2 | |
re PR c/57773 (-Wpedantic incorrect warning for enum bit-field)
PR c/57773
* doc/implement-c.texi: Mention that other integer types are
permitted as bit-field types in strictly conforming mode.
c/
* c-decl.c (check_bitfield_type_and_width): Warn for implementation
defined bit-field types only in ISO C.
testsuite/
* gcc.dg/pr57773.c: New test.
From-SVN: r206373
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/doc/implement-c.texi')
| -rw-r--r-- | gcc/doc/implement-c.texi | 5 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/doc/implement-c.texi b/gcc/doc/implement-c.texi index 2ddae63..762ffe0 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/implement-c.texi +++ b/gcc/doc/implement-c.texi @@ -479,9 +479,8 @@ by the @option{-funsigned-bitfields} option. @cite{Allowable bit-field types other than @code{_Bool}, @code{signed int}, and @code{unsigned int} (C99 and C11 6.7.2.1).} -No other types are permitted in strictly conforming mode. -@c Would it be better to restrict the pedwarn for other types to C90 -@c mode and document the other types for C99/C11 mode? +Other integer types, such as @code{long int}, and enumerated types are +permitted even in strictly conforming mode. @item @cite{Whether atomic types are permitted for bit-fields (C11 6.7.2.1).} |