[cfe-dev] cfe-dev Digest, Vol 49, Issue 106

[Peter Lawrence]

Peter,
Chandler,
                    hopefully I can add something without "throwing  
gas on the fire".!.

if you believe that most array bounds violations are dynamic (can't  
be caught
at compile time, would require run-time bounds checking code), then  
it would
seem that being pedantic about static - size - '1' arrays that are  
the last field
of  a struct (a "standard" coding practice for a long long time) is  
mis-placed
effort, and detecting them with a static analyzer is giving people a  
false sense
of security where none is warranted.

-Peter Lawrence.





On Jul 29, 2011, at 3:56 AM, cfe-dev-request at cs.uiuc.edu wrote:

> Anyway, I'm disappointing that no headway has been made on this issue
> after a week. Chandler, could you please let me know if it is still
> your intent to fix this problem, and if so whether or not you favour
> suppressing it in C99 too?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20110804/84d469b1/attachment.html>