Re: [Tinycc-devel] State of the tcc project (jiang)

[lifenjoiner]

Hi,


> On Behalf Of jiang

> index 22a8278..2fd4614 100644
> @@ -1655,6 +1655,15 @@ void bitfield_test(void)
>       else
>           printf("st1.f2 != -1\n");
> 
> +    /* XXX: gcc bug

My logic is:
If it is a bug, why we should follow a wrong way?

Aidan Dodds wrote: It looks like you are trying to reproduce a gcc bug, ---
I agree.

> +    st1.f1 = st1.f2 = st1.f3 = st1.f4 = st1.f5 = 3;
> +    printf("%d %d %d %d %d\n",
> +           st1.f1, st1.f2, st1.f3, st1.f4, st1.f5);
> +*/
> +    st1.f2 = st1.f3 = st1.f4 = st1.f5 = 3;
> +    printf("%d %d %d %d %d\n",
> +           st1.f2, st1.f3, st1.f4, st1.f5);
> +
>       /* bit sizes below must be bigger than 32 since GCC doesn't allow
>          long-long bitfields whose size is not bigger than int */
>       struct sbf2 {
>