Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:11:17 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> Cc: brandt@fokus.gmd.de, freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Re: A few questions about a few includes Message-ID: <20020304181117.A594@student.uu.se> In-Reply-To: <20020304.093529.35706437.imp@village.org>; from imp@village.org on Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 09:35:29AM -0700 References: <20020303180029.GA56041@student.uu.se> <20020304102750.O74223-100000@beagle.fokus.gmd.de> <20020304104158.GB63341@student.uu.se> <20020304.093529.35706437.imp@village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 09:35:29AM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20020304104158.GB63341@student.uu.se>
> Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> writes:
> : I think it is still there (and my draft copy says the same thing).
> : I was thinking about the original C89 standard which does not allow it
> : (and does not allow incomplete array types in structs). Guess I should
> : have said which standard I was referring to.
>
> struct foo {
> char array[0];
> };
>
> appears to be in C-99 but not C-89. If you have the draft, so far the
> only thing I've noticed that is different between the draft and the
> final standard is that there's 10-15 more footnotes in the final
> standard than were in the final draft.
>
> Warner
Are you sure that is in C99?
What is allowed in C99 (but wasn't in C89) is
struct foo
{
int b;
char array[];
};
Note that you must have a 'normal' field before the incomplete array.
I don't think
char array[0];
is allowed in either of C89 or C99.
--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013@student.uu.se
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020304181117.A594>