From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se (smtp-2.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.160])
	by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q58C63kg010846
	for <tech@mdocml.bsd.lv>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 08:06:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91])
	by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8460114FAD5;
	Fri,  8 Jun 2012 14:05:57 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se
Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se ([130.237.32.160])
	by mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id ZlxJX0wGLBG1; Fri,  8 Jun 2012 14:05:56 +0200 (CEST)
X-KTH-Auth: kristaps [193.10.49.5]
X-KTH-mail-from: kristaps@bsd.lv
Received: from ctime.hhs.se (ctime.hhs.se [193.10.49.5])
	by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id B714F14FA53;
	Fri,  8 Jun 2012 14:05:55 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4FD1EAA3.7060306@bsd.lv>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 14:05:55 +0200
From: Kristaps Dzonsons <kristaps@bsd.lv>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; OpenBSD amd64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110805 Thunderbird/5.0
X-Mailinglist: mdocml-tech
Reply-To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: espie@nerim.net
CC: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv
Subject: Re: mandocdb tools, sqlite3, and ohash
References: <4FD0C58C.5040104@bsd.lv> <20120607165106.GA8819@lain.home>
In-Reply-To: <20120607165106.GA8819@lain.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 06/07/12 18:51, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 05:15:24PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote:
>>    struct  str {
>>          ...stuff here...
>>          char key[1];
>>    };
>>
>> ...with allocation in the regular way (the struct size plus the
>> string length).  Is this known to play nicely with all compilers?  I
>> can't think of a better way without modifying the ohash routines to
>> work with key pointers.
>
> Yes, it will "work".
> All old compilers I know will accept it,
> and it has been formally normalized in C99, with a slightly different
> syntax.
>
> Refer to 6.7.2.1 16
> It talks about flexible array members.
>
> For C99, the syntax should be
>
> struct str {
> 	...
> 	char key[];
> };
>
> and obviously, the length is smaller by one.
>
> as far as I know, all compilers do still accept the former syntax and will
> work just fine on all architectures that matter.

Marc,

Thanks for the note.  I'll use the C99 approach and will add the 
necessary bits if people complain.

Best,

Kristaps
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv