Re: [PATCH] c/67882 - improve -Warray-bounds for invalid offsetof

[Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt@redhat.com>]

On 10/23/2015 06:50 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>> But now that I'm re-reading the answer above I see that Joseph
>> was suggesting that a5_7[5][0] should be diagnosed when the patch
>> accepts it as an extension.  I think we do want to accept it
>> because a5_7 is treated as a flexible array member (as an extension)
>> and so the upper bound of the major index is unknown. I.e., FA5_7
>> is defined like so:
>
> If you treat it as a flexible array member, then, yes, it would be valid.

Ok, let's install the patch as-is, and postpone the discussion of 
whether that is a valid flexible array member (I certainly wouldn't have 
guessed so from the documentation which only mentions [], [0] and [1] as 
valid cases).

I guess this is a case where I could say either "I wrote the patch" or 
"I requested changes to a patch in review"; in the latter case I can 
approve it. Joseph seems on board with what we've discussed, so I'd say 
please wait until Tuesday for objections then commit.


Bernd