Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #93560

Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99?

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99?
Date Thu, 15 Sep 2016 13:46:25 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Lines 42
Message-ID <lnk2ec3n8e.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink)
References <6b5aa241-0498-4e41-993b-a1ed445effb0@googlegroups.com> <kfnd1k7jton.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <lntwdj5lv2.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfnmvjaiwbw.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <lnlgyu5qin.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfneg4miar7.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <ln8tuu5h4x.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <kfn1t0lhwzn.fsf@x-alumni2.alumni.caltech.edu> <f370cc9a-7f45-49f7-b678-470534b84297@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="24704"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX183YSfzGcn2W1WdQ1EMxNFt"
User-Agent Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock sha1:PeyftX329hND59StvlkpNBIHjMI= sha1:zy8wl/t+00OxSqBgQjOEYlWxKXE=
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.c:93560

Show key headers only | View raw


supercat@casperkitty.com writes:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 12:52:06 PM UTC-5, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>> (Incidentally, I think your statement about enumerated types
>> and integer types is not exactly right, because enumerated
>> types may not be used as the type specifier for a bitfield,
>> even when the compatible integer type could be used instead.
>> Of course an enumerated type _Bool could be given a special
>> exception for that, as was done for the integer type _Bool in
>> C99, but the observation about bitfields does point out a
>> difference in the general question.)
>
> I consider it unfortunate that the authors of the Standard seem averse to
> the idea of giving implementations the freedom to accept or reject certain
> syntactic forms at their leisure.  That would seem to me the best way to
> handle constructs that may or may not have enough value to justify making
> compiler writers support them.  Whether or not the ability to use an
> enum bitfield would be sufficiently valuable as to mandate that
> implementations must support it, I see nothing to be gained by suggesting
> that implementers who want to support it, shouldn't.

Congratulations, you have your wish.

N1570 6.7.2.1p5:

    A bit-field shall have a type that is a qualified or unqualified
    version of _Bool, signed int, unsigned int, or some other
    implementation-defined type.

Implementations are free to accept bit-fields of enumerated types, and
are not required to diagnose them.  (One example: gcc 6.2.0 accepts an
enumerated bit field and doesn't warn about it even with "-std=c11
-pedantic -Wall -Wextra".)

Please check the standard before complaining about it.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? thiago.adams@gmail.com - 2016-09-12 13:24 -0700
  Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-12 21:56 +0100
    Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-12 15:59 -0700
    Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-13 16:05 -0700
      Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-13 18:17 -0700
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-14 01:20 +0100
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-14 03:59 -0700
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Nobody <nobody@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-09-14 17:31 +0100
          Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 09:49 -0700
            Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 11:45 -0700
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2016-09-14 14:13 -0700
          Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 16:26 -0700
  Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-09-12 17:11 -0400
  Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-13 15:55 -0700
    Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-13 18:08 -0700
      Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-14 03:56 -0700
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 07:58 -0700
          Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-14 19:39 +0100
            Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 13:52 -0700
              Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-15 00:53 +0100
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 17:04 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 20:52 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 19:26 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 19:04 -0700
            Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 14:21 -0700
              Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 16:23 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 17:06 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 20:45 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-14 22:12 -0400
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-15 12:37 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 09:35 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 00:47 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 22:02 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 09:56 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-16 07:34 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 20:31 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-16 12:32 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-17 23:30 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-09-15 18:25 +0100
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 12:35 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 00:51 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 17:02 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-16 19:23 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-17 23:35 +0200
        Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 10:40 -0700
          Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 10:01 -0700
            Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 11:35 -0700
              Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-14 22:15 -0400
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-14 23:51 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-15 15:14 -0400
              Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-15 16:08 +1200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-15 12:46 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 09:37 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 00:53 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 21:45 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-16 06:32 +0100
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 09:59 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-16 11:00 +0100
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:46 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-16 12:58 +0100
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-09-16 12:06 +0000
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 05:13 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-16 10:47 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-16 10:46 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 10:02 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-15 11:42 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 10:19 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-16 08:06 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 20:51 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 11:56 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-22 22:38 -0700
          Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-14 11:42 -0700
            Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-14 14:02 -0700
              Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-15 10:51 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 11:18 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-15 13:46 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-15 13:10 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-15 16:01 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-15 13:40 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-09-16 07:21 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 07:37 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-16 20:55 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-16 14:43 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-16 15:36 -0700
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-17 23:45 +0200
                Re: Why _Bool was not defined as enum in C99? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-17 17:14 -0700

csiph-web