This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [c++] RFC: partial C99 designated-initializers support


Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:

> Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:
>> 
>>>What does C99 say should happen in this case:
>>>
>>>  int i[] = { [3] = 7, [2] = i[3] };
>>>
>>>?
>> I don't think this is valid because i does not have a complete type
>> until
>> after the initializer.
>
> Good point.  Does it make any difference if it's "int i[8]"?

6.7.8#23 says:

  The order in which any side effects occur among the initialization list
  expressions is unspecified.

with a refence to footnote 130:

  In particular, the evaluation order need not be the same as the order of
  subobject initialization.

which suggests that it is undefined.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]