Created on 2016-02-08.00:00:00 last changed 40 months ago
Proposed resolution (November, 2017)
Change 11.4.10 [class.bit] paragraph 2 as follows:
A declaration for a bit-field that omits the identifier declares an unnamed bit-field. Unnamed bit-fields are not members and cannot be initialized. An unnamed bit-field shall not be declared with a cv-qualified type. [Note: An unnamed bit-field is useful for padding...
[Accepted as a DR at the March, 2018 (Jacksonville) meeting.]
According to 11.4.10 [class.bit] paragraph 2, unnamed bit-fields are not members, but there does not appear to be a prohibition against their being declared volatile. Is this intended?
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2020-12-15 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: dr -> cd5 |
| 2018-04-11 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: tentatively ready -> dr |
| 2018-02-27 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg5866 |
| 2018-02-27 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: open -> tentatively ready |
| 2016-02-08 00:00:00 | admin | create | |