[cfe-dev] Better type-specifier representation
kremenek at apple.com
Fri Sep 12 17:04:12 PDT 2008
On Sep 12, 2008, at 4:44 PM, Argiris Kirtzidis wrote:
> Ted Kremenek wrote:
>> The one outstanding grossness that I can think of right now is
>> VLAs. How should we represent:
>> int x[foo()][bar()][...], y;
>> Right now, the type for the VLA owns the expressions foo(), bar(),
>> and so on. Both DeclGroups and TypeSpecifiers don't solve this
>> problem (I believe).
> Is this restricted to VLAs ?
> Doesn't this have the same issue ?:
> const int x=10;
> int y[x+1]; // type owning expression "x+1"
Huh. Does gcc treat 'y' and as a VLA or as a constant-sized array? I
guess gcc's constant folding built into the frontend would make that a
More information about the cfe-dev