Yes, I was assuming the same approach as for the existing void data declaration, that the structure is given a nominal size, for just the reasons you give. (That's what gcc seems to do.)
On 1 July 2012 23:22, Comeau At9Fans <[email protected]> wrote: > Many compilers do just that, however, that said, unless the compiler is > prepared for it, since it effectively yields a struct of zero size which > normally is a no-go, it could produce bugs involving sizeof, initializers, > pointer addition et al, even some divisions by zero if the compiler is > making certain assumptions already, unless it already can have zero length > objects of this nature for some other reasons.
