From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-423290-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 27183 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2016 22:31:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26178 invoked by uid 89); 15 Mar 2016 22:31:44 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mail-qg0-f45.google.com
Received: from mail-qg0-f45.google.com (HELO mail-qg0-f45.google.com) (209.85.192.45) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:31:42 +0000
Received: by mail-qg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id w104so28149518qge.1        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc;        bh=DO0Y7HYMK3Z0RsYYc+IKb7GCICKrfocT70ZjHNdixDY=;        b=Hk6WpmxluU+2FVylmH/iMziV+JJhvcCRyRRQl2Mst76sT38VLfeDzXJt5rvU+t4Q7p         Z1w8tXyctTLf0ZotEPpYZiVM2OhhcqrRfm2p+q/nwzEge6gtj5NMpNCWA160kPhq9Qzj         cKtXz2YvbYfjAJHvqyp+zpNXsuDRM310kjM5vqDHeQIh9350+PHlNq9t830UVapFmyHh         6Lw6nRMWago2JGtwsn0iIW9nj1KVNkBhWV4dX1ul7SBB3QJEZhpQl/sRfbOWSEc4SlTe         vHZpFzPKI0Wy2At/SUUnJne4hhxC3N/KvNyXzSw36MVhbpptf+K89vbf2MWoInPUNrRP         WJjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJwmQSi0nP8ZXty8ihHFSMT5nM9EsUepnQs8EkR68iIrWTWGomWGAzV0FU4CG5pGxISkVr2TSo8u5sh5Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.163.84 with SMTP id j81mr808768qhj.68.1458081100714; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:31:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.55.15.199 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:31:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1603152138570.17533@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <CAMe9rOrx2TKEnBsSzCkB6eB33FjsaFoyKqx68D=jgNzxjhNHng@mail.gmail.com>	<20160302162538.66068C88E@oc7340732750.ibm.com>	<CAMe9rOqF-B-he1JWaxq5++1a75vKtpECRAgcMDd+EbjdxQzLdQ@mail.gmail.com>	<56E82BC4.7070401@redhat.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.10.1603152138570.17533@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:31:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOq-EmEDSOvo-ycJ2PkZZyupcLVbTpEumKMAfQos2=8TKw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>, 	GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, 	Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg00862.txt.bz2

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 2:39 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure if the zero-size arrays (a GNU extension) are considered to
> make a struct non-empty, but in any case I think the tests should cover
> such arrays as elements of structs.

There are couple tests for structs with members of array
of empty types.  testsuite/g++.dg/abi/empty14.h has

struct dummy0 { };
struct dummy { struct dummy0 d[140]; };

-- 
H.J.