[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison

[John Regehr]

> I started looking through the llvm-gcc vs. clang comparisons, and
> noticed that in
> http://embed.cs.utah.edu/embarrassing/jan_10/harvest/source/A9/A9AB5AE7.c
> , size_t is declared incorrectly.  Any idea how that might have
> happened?

Hi Eli,

Thanks for pointing this out, I'll look into this tonight.

However I can give you the quick generic answer right now (of course you 
already know it) which is that real C code does just about anything that 
can be parsed :).

If LLVM warns about this incorrect definition I can eliminate this kind of 
test case, I'll look into this as well.

John