PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class
Joseph Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
Wed Mar 16 00:25:00 GMT 2016
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2016, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> >> > I'm not sure if the zero-size arrays (a GNU extension) are considered to
> >> > make a struct non-empty, but in any case I think the tests should cover
> >> > such arrays as elements of structs.
> >>
> >> There are couple tests for structs with members of array
> >> of empty types. testsuite/g++.dg/abi/empty14.h has
> >
> > My concern is the other way round - structs with elements such as
> > "int a[0];", an array [0] of a nonempty type. My reading of the subobject
> > definition is that such an array should not cause the struct to be
> > considered nonempty (it doesn't result in any int subobjects).
>
> This is a test for struct with zero-size array, which isn't treated
> as empty type. C++ and C are compatible in its passing.
Where is the current definition of empty types you're proposing for use in
GCC? Is the behavior of this case clear from that definition?
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list