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: alignof(int[]) (was Re: [C++ Patch] PR 51316)

From: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 18:34:19 +0100
Subject: Re: alignof(int[]) (was Re: [C++ Patch] PR 51316)
References: <4EFBAF5B.8050700@oracle.com> <4EFDF47B.6070703@redhat.com>

Hi,

On 12/30/2011 06:27 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:

On 12/28/2011 07:07 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
I think the resolution of core/930 and C++11 itself are pretty clear:
alignof of an array of unknown bound is fine, provided the element type
is complete of course.
I think it makes sense for this change to apply to C as well, on the same principle that an array of unknown bound does have known alignment. C maintainers?

FWIW, I also think it would make sense but - I'm not sure whether you went through the audit trail - Joseph maintained in Comment #3 that C1X is pretty clear about a required diagnostics.

Paolo.

References:
- [C++ Patch] PR 51316
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- alignof(int[]) (was Re: [C++ Patch] PR 51316)
  - From: Jason Merrill

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