Why must bitfields sum to a multiple of a byte?

[Ali Çehreli]

On 07/31/2012 09:15 AM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
 > On Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 15:25:55 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
 >> On 7/31/12, monarch_dodra <monarchdodra at gmail.com> wrote:
 >>> The bug is only when the field is EXACTLY 32 bits BTW. bitfields
 >>> works quite nice with 33 or whatever. More details in the report.
 >>
 >> Yeah 32 or 64 bits, thanks for changing the title.
 >
 > I wonder, is it really a bug? If you are going to have it fill a whole
 > size it would fit anyways, why even put it in as a bitfield? You could
 > just declare it separately.

It can happen in templated code where the width of the first field may 
be a template parameter. I wouldn't want to 'static if (width == 32)'.

But thanks for fixing the bug already! :)

Ali