This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: funny problem with g++
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 11:43:31PM +0200, Michael Veksler wrote:
> Quoting Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>
> > On 12/7/05, Morten Welinder <mwelinder@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > He is kind of right, though. Outside struct (or perhaps union),
> > > zero-sized arrays
> > > make little sense and could be rejected. Or else I am missing something
> > too.
> >
> > Well, as nearly all gcc language extensions, the extension specification
> > is not a formal specification, but more like handwaving ...
> >
> > Rather than restricting the extension, we should consider deprecating it
> > (for C++!) in 4.1 and remove it from 4.2. I see no use for it in C++ code
> > and recent actions were in favor of removing C++ language extensions.
>
> Unless they are needed for portability with C headers.
> POD structs and basic types should be consistent between C and C++.
That's an argument for continuing to allow the extension in a POD.