From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Mar 20 11:35:23 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from noc.untraceable.net (noc.untraceable.net [166.84.189.65])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A5E37B71A
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 11:35:19 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from atatat@atatdot.net)
Received: (from andrew@localhost)
	by noc.untraceable.net (8.12.0.Beta5/8.12.0.Beta5/bonk!) id f2KJZ9xg029944;
	Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:35:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:35:08 -0500
From: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
To: Greywolf <greywolf@starwolf.com>
Cc: Shankar Agarwal <shankar_agarwal@net.com>, tech-kern@netbsd.org,
	bsd hackers <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: Question regarding the array of size 0.
Message-ID: <20010320143508.A29869@noc.untraceable.net>
Reply-To: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
References: <3AB7A76B.2BCF5D6E@net.com> <Pine.NEB.4.30.0103201101010.5239-100000@starjumper.starwolf.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.30.0103201101010.5239-100000@starjumper.starwolf.com>; from greywolf@starwolf.com on Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:31:40AM -0800
X-Hi-To-All-My-Friends-In-Domestic-Surveillance: hi there, sports fans  :)
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:31:40AM -0800, Greywolf wrote:
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Shankar Agarwal wrote:
>
># Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:54:35 -0800
># From: Shankar Agarwal <shankar_agarwal@net.com>
># To: tech-kern@netbsd.org
># Cc: bsd hackers <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
># Subject: Question regarding the array of size 0.
>#
># Hi All,
># #define syscallarg(x)                           \
>#     union {                             \
>#         register_t pad;                     \
>#         struct { x datum; } le;                 \
>#         struct {                        \
>#             int8_t pad[ (sizeof (register_t) < sizeof (x))  \
>#                 ? 0                 \
>#                 : sizeof (register_t) - sizeof (x)];    \
>#             x datum;                    \
>#         } be;                           \
>#     }
>#
># struct sys_exit_args {
>#     syscallarg(int) rval;
># };
>
>I thought ?: were evaluated at run-time, not compile-time?

any halfway decent optimizing compiler ought to be reducing the number
of useless constants in its output, this being an example of such.

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message