> -----Original Message----- > From: > avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. > org] On Behalf Of David Brown > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:47 AM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Re: zero length array in nocommon > > Weddington, Eric wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- From: > >> avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org > >> [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. org] > >> On Behalf Of Ruud Vlaming Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:45 > >> AM To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: zero > >> length array in nocommon > >> > >> My question was, why is there a difference in behaviour, and i > >> hoped somebody could shine some light on this. But maybe it is like > >> J"org says, just a bug. > > > > You're probably the first to discover such a difference. At least on > > the AVR toolchain anyway. > > A brief test shows that the same difference exists when > compiling with > gcc for the ColdFire (I don't remember the gcc version > off-hand). It is > therefore not an avr-gcc specific feature.
Then I would hazard a guess and say that it's probably NOT a bug. I know that the Coldfire port is very well maintained these days, and if it were a bug, then it probably would've been fixed already. _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
