[Bug c/17023] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE with nested functions in parameter declaration

["jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk  2004-10-14 20:05 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE with nested functions
 in parameter declaration

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:

> You do?  Hm, in which case I may need to persue a different solution than 
> the one I'm currently testing.  Also, if true, I don't see why a nested
> function wouldn't be acceptable there:
> 
>   int b[({ int h() { return 1; } h(); })]

Perhaps you can make nested functions work there, but they seem very 
dubious when not actually within a function body.  Whereas since array 
size expressions can include calls to other functions, or recursively to 
the same function, or indeed jump out of the evaluation of array size 
expressions with longjmp, statement expressions seem more reasonable there 
(though if they attempt to jump into the body of the function that might 
be problematic).



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17023