From: Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@oracle.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Martin Uecker <uecker@tugraz.at>,
Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"richard.guenther@gmail.com" <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
"jakub@redhat.com" <jakub@redhat.com>,
"keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"siddhesh@gotplt.org" <siddhesh@gotplt.org>,
"isanbard@gmail.com" <isanbard@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [V1][PATCH 1/3] Provide element_count attribute to flexible array member field (PR108896)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 19:40:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C5FFB1CD-9B19-460B-991B-6BB0EEF8BE34@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ff28b5b5-4d85-a677-9a7d-4268ab62fb1b@codesourcery.com>
> On Jun 16, 2023, at 5:35 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, Qing Zhao via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>>> So for
>>>
>>> struct foo { int c; int buf[(struct { int d; }){ .d = .c }]; };
>>>
>>> one knows during parsing that the .d is a designator
>>> and that .c is not.
>>
>> Therefore, the above should be invalid based on this rule since .c is
>> not a member in the current structure.
>
> What do you mean by "current structure"? I think two different concepts
> are being conflated: the structure *being initialized* (what the C
> standard calls the "current object" for a brace-enclosed initializer
> list),
I think the concept of “current structure” should be stick to this.
> and the structure *being defined*.
Not this.
(Forgive me about my poor English -:)).
Then it will be cleaner?
What’s your opinion?
> The former is what's relevant
> for designators. The latter is what's relevant for the suggested new
> syntax. And .c *is* a member of the structure being defined in this
> example.
>
> Those two structure types are always different, except for corner cases
> with C2x tag compatibility (where an object of structure type might be
> initialized in the middle of a redefinition of that type).
Can you give an example on this? Thanks.
Qing
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-20 19:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-25 16:14 [V1][PATCH 0/3] New attribute "element_count" to annotate bounds for C99 FAM(PR108896) Qing Zhao
2023-05-25 16:14 ` [V1][PATCH 1/3] Provide element_count attribute to flexible array member field (PR108896) Qing Zhao
2023-05-25 21:02 ` Joseph Myers
2023-05-26 13:32 ` Qing Zhao
2023-05-26 18:15 ` Joseph Myers
2023-05-26 19:09 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-07 19:59 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-07 20:53 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-07 21:32 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-07 22:05 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-08 13:06 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-15 15:09 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-15 16:55 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-15 19:54 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-15 22:48 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-16 15:01 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-16 7:21 ` Martin Uecker
2023-06-16 15:14 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-16 16:21 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-16 17:07 ` Martin Uecker
2023-06-16 20:20 ` Qing Zhao
2023-06-16 21:35 ` Joseph Myers
2023-06-20 19:40 ` Qing Zhao [this message]
2023-06-27 15:44 ` Qing Zhao
2023-05-25 16:14 ` [V1][PATCH 2/3] Use the element_count atribute info in builtin object size [PR108896] Qing Zhao
2023-05-27 10:20 ` Martin Uecker
2023-05-30 16:08 ` Qing Zhao
2023-05-25 16:14 ` [V1][PATCH 3/3] Use the element_count attribute information in bound sanitizer[PR108896] Qing Zhao
2023-05-26 16:12 ` [V1][PATCH 0/3] New attribute "element_count" to annotate bounds for C99 FAM(PR108896) Kees Cook
2023-05-30 21:44 ` Qing Zhao
2023-05-26 20:40 ` Kees Cook
2023-05-30 15:43 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-06 18:56 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-06 21:10 ` Martin Uecker
2023-07-07 15:47 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-07 20:21 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-13 20:31 ` Kees Cook
2023-07-17 21:17 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-17 23:40 ` Kees Cook
2023-07-18 15:37 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-18 16:03 ` Martin Uecker
2023-07-18 16:25 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-18 16:50 ` Martin Uecker
2023-07-18 18:53 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-19 8:41 ` Martin Uecker
2023-07-19 16:16 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-19 18:52 ` Qing Zhao
2023-07-31 20:14 ` Qing Zhao
2023-08-01 22:45 ` Kees Cook
2023-08-02 6:25 ` Martin Uecker
2023-08-02 15:02 ` Qing Zhao
2023-08-02 15:09 ` Qing Zhao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=C5FFB1CD-9B19-460B-991B-6BB0EEF8BE34@oracle.com \
--to=qing.zhao@oracle.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=isanbard@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=siddhesh@gotplt.org \
--cc=uecker@tugraz.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).