From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4A5BF452.1090502@tecmav.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:58:26 +0200
From: Adriano Verardo <a.verardo@tecmav.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20080213
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
References: <37a4205e0ebcee3f0fd82131999a1e5d@quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <37a4205e0ebcee3f0fd82131999a1e5d@quanstro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] C compiler question
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1e98bf42-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

erik quanstrom wrote:

>>8c silently accept the above definition and sizeof(U) is 100.  ???
>>The sources which include the definition of "NeverDefined" are
>>regularly compiled too and sizeof(U) = 100 + sizeof(NeverDefined).
>>
>>
>>
>
>i think the issue is that there isn't currently a distinction
>between this
>
>	typedef struct A A;
>	struct A {
>		int	expand[0];
>	};
>
>which is perfectly legal and this
>
>	typedef struct U U;
>	typedef struct A A;
>	struct A {
>		U;
>	};
>
>
Yes, but in my example - sorry - "NeverDefined" doesn't mean "declared and
defined elsewhere (or not)" but "not declared .and. not defined".

No doubt this should be a fatal error, but 8c accepts.
What's my mistake ?

adriano