Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:50:25 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Peter Seebach <seebs@plethora.net> Cc: Todd Whitesel <toddpw@best.com>, tech-kern@netbsd.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Question regarding the array of size 0. Message-ID: <20010329235022.W9431@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <200103300749.f2U7n8810171@guild.plethora.net>; from seebs@plethora.net on Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 01:49:07AM -0600 References: <200103300647.WAA25263@shell17.ba.best.com> <200103300749.f2U7n8810171@guild.plethora.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Peter Seebach <seebs@plethora.net> [010329 23:49] wrote: > In message <200103300647.WAA25263@shell17.ba.best.com>, Todd Whitesel writes: > >Just put a 1-element array at the end of your header struct, and account for > >it when you work out how much extra space to allocate. C memory layout rules > >guarantee that this usage will have the desired effect. > > Nope, not portable. The implementation is allowed to bust you for > overstepping the bounds of the array. :) > > The only portable solution is the new feature in C99. Which new feature? -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] Daemon News Magazine in your snail-mail! http://magazine.daemonnews.org/ 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?20010329235022.W9431>