Re: c/10225: [3.3/3.4 regression] Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly

Re: c/10225: [3.3/3.4 regression] Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly

[rth]

Synopsis: [3.3/3.4 regression] Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly

Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->rth
Responsible-Changed-By: rth
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 27 09:26:26 2003
Responsible-Changed-Why:
    .
State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed
State-Changed-By: rth
State-Changed-When: Thu Mar 27 09:26:26 2003
State-Changed-Why:
    It was a bug that 3.2 accepted this.  For 3.3 and beyond this
    is accepted with the -fms-extensions switch, but not otherwise.
    
    I'll admit the documentation needs clarification, but it's
    also true that you'll not find this "feature" documented
    anywhere in the 3.2 tree.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10225

Re: c/10225: [3.3/3.4 regression] Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly

[bangerth]

Old Synopsis: Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly in 3.3
New Synopsis: [3.3/3.4 regression] Unnamed structs aren't handled correctly

State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Wed Mar 26 17:27:39 2003
State-Changed-Why:
    Behavior confirmed. I cannot say anything about the validity of
    the code, but we get a message now with 3.3 and mainline,
    where we didn't before. Needs a C language lawyer.
    
    W.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10225