🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4hkgds$bbh@info1.sdrc.com>, I wrote (quoting the standard):
>
>	The expression that specifies the width of a bit-field shall be
>	an integral constant expression that nas nonnegative value that
>	shall not exceed the number of bits in an ordinary object of
>	compatible type.

In article <uYgPxQ9ytt9W084yn@csn.net>, thads@csn.net (Thad Smith) writes:
> What does "ordinary object of compatible type" mean?  Could that mean
> long?  I now think that an implementation could allow specification of
> a number of bits greater than int, but less than or equal to bits in
> long.  To access the value, the programmer casts the bit-field to long
> or unsigned long.  The cast would preceed the integral promotion, I
> think, and allow access to the longer value.

An ordinary object (i.e., not a bit-field) with the same type as the
declared type of the bit-field which is required to be int, signed int,
or unsigned int.  As Norm Diamond pointed out, that requirement is in
semantics, not constraints, so an implementation is free to add an
extension allowing other types (like long), and some do.  Such
implementations presumably extend the integral promotion rules in the
obvious fashion as well in order to eliminate the need for casts.
----
Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH  45150-2789  513-576-2070
larry.jones@sdrc.com
Santa's gonna skip this block for years. -- Calvin