[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pcc-list
Subject:    Re: i386: bitfield assignments
From:       Stefan Kempf <stefan () nefkom ! net>
Date:       2007-12-22 22:50:55
Message-ID: 20071222225055.GC23494 () murdock ! my-fqdn ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Gregory McGarry wrote:
>
> On 22/12/2007, at 7:03 PM, Stefan Kempf wrote:
>
>> Gregory McGarry wrote:
>>>> It seems that every arch needs slightly different behavior for H, S, N
>>>> and M.
>>>
>>> What are these differences?
>>
>> That was the SL and HL stuff you were using. For i386, it was the
>> assignment check I added, and the way the sizes should be printed.
>> Maybe for some the default code is just fine.
>
> Yeah, I removed the SL and HL stuff:  It didn't work for
>
> int x = s.x = 1;
>
> I made it match your implementation on i386.
>
> Thanks for fixing this.

I have to thank you for your testcase. It made me find out what the
INAREG cookie in field assignments is for.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]