[PATCH] accept flexible arrays in struct in unions (c++/71912 - [6/7 regression])

Martin Sebor msebor@gmail.com
Wed Aug 3 20:23:00 GMT 2016

On 08/03/2016 02:01 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Do you have ideas about how to improve the naming?  Perhaps change
>>>> I haven't thought about changing names but TYPE_NO_LINKAGE_NAME
>>>> seems better than TYPE_ANONYMOUS_P.
>>> Or perhaps TYPE_UNNAMED_P.
>> TYPE_UNNAMED_P would work but it wouldn't be a replacement for
>> It sounds like TYPE_ANONYMOUS_P is the right name and the problem
>> is that the value it returns isn't accurate until the full context
>> to which it applies has been seen.
> I think you're thinking of ANON_AGGR_TYPE_P, which identifies
> anonymous structs/unions; TYPE_ANONYMOUS_P identifies unnamed classes.

Doh!  You're right.  I let the name confuse me again. Clearly
TYPE_ANONYMOUS_P isn't the best name since it doesn't correspond
to the C/C++ concept of an anonymous struct or union.  TYPE_UNNAMED
would be better (the same can be said about the C++ diagnostics that
refer to unnamed structs as <anonymous struct>.)

>> I wonder if the right solution to this class of problems (which
>> are probably unavoidable in the front end as the tree is being
>> constructed), is to design an API that prevents using these
>> "unreliable" queries until they can return a reliable result.
> It would be possible to change ANON_AGGR_TYPE_P to require
> COMPLETE_TYPE_P, but a lot of uses will need to be adjusted to avoid
> crashing.

No, crashing shouldn't happen.  It shouldn't be possible to call
the function unless/until the node that represents the concept
has been fully constructed. Using C++ syntax:

   void foo (tree *t)
     if (ANONYMOUS_STRUCT *anon = dynamic_cast<ANONYMOUS_STRUCT*>(t))
       anon->function_only_defined_in_anonymous_struct ();

I was hoping something like this was close to what someone (Andrew?)
has been working on.


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list