<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">On Mar 1, 2014, at 7:15 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@google.com">chandlerc@google.com</a>> wrote:<div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dexonsmith@apple.com" target="_blank">dexonsmith@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; position: static; z-index: auto;">The current guidelines [1] on the use of the struct keyword are too<br>
restrictive and apparently ignored. They limit the use of struct to<br>
PODs, citing broken compilers.<br>
<br>
The guidelines are out-of-date and should be relaxed. Here’s why:<br>
<br>
1. Our updated list of supported compilers should all deal correctly<br>
with non-POD structs.<br>
<br>
2. A quick grep of the source suggests that no one paid attention<br>
anyway.<br>
<br>
I’ve attached a patch that removes the guideline entirely (matching<br>
the apparent current practice), but does anyone feel a new explicit<br>
guideline is in order?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>We should at least remove it, the rule is nonsense as you point out.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>This rule was specifically about brokenness with some version of MSVC. That version (I have no idea which, or if it still does that) mangled classes and structs differently. If this isn't the case for the currently supported version of MSVC, we should definitely remove this guideline.</div><div><br></div><div>-Chris</div><br></body></html>