disallow & applied to shared bitfields

[Former user]

Originally reported on Google Code with ID 77 ``` Presently, section 6.4.4 reads:

6.4.4 Address operators

Semantics

1 When the unary & is applied to a shared structure element of type T, the result has type shared [] T *.

This issue proposes that this section be ammended to read: "shared structure element of type T that is not a bitfield"

--- Questions:

Would it be more appropriate to state a constraint that & may not be applied to shared bitfields, and leave the current Semantics clause as is?

What does C99 say about applying & to bitfields, can we simply follow suit. ```

Reported by `gary.funck` on 2012-07-18 21:32:14

[Former user]

``` C99 disallows & applied to bit-fields. Quote from the WG14/N1256 draft appears below.

6.5.3.2 Address and indirection operators

Constraints

1 The operand of the unary & operator shall be either a function designator, the result of a [] or unary * operator, or an lvalue that designates an object that is not a bit-field and is not declared with the register storage-class specifier. ```

Reported by `[e-mail]` on 2012-07-18 21:38:20

[Former user]

``` Sounds like no change is required.

Good candidate for inclusion in the rationale document. ```

Reported by `danbonachea` on 2012-08-03 13:14:17 - Status changed: `NoChange`