[PATCH] D126864: [clang] Introduce -fstrict-flex-arrays=<n> for stricter handling of flexible arrays

[serge via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

serge-sans-paille added a comment.

GCC and Clang don't have the same behavior wrt. macros-as-abound and standard-layout-requirement, see https://godbolt.org/z/3vc4TcTYz
I'm fine with keeping the CLang behavior, but do we want to keep it only for level=0, and drop it for higher level (this would look odd to me).

I'd say that we keep it for level 0,1,2, but then I think we should *not* make it an option of the `isFlexibleArrayMember` method. That would allow for inconsistent behavior wrt. FAM across the codebase and I'm not a fan of it.

Thoughts?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864