"Dave Korn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| ----Original Message----
| >From: Richard Henderson
| >Sent: 19 September 2005 11:26
|
| > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 12:07:45PM +0200, Sebastian Pop wrote:
| >> By the way, how is this different than detecting a bound on: ...
| >> int foo[1335];
| > ...
| >> some_struct{ int foo[1335];} s;
| >
| > Because here the variables are *known* to have a specific size.
| >
| > Similarly with static and global variables, though you must be
| > careful for
| >
| > struct S { struct B b; int x[]; };
| > struct T { struct S s; int x2[10]; } t;
| >
| > where (&t.s) is used as an S in places that expect it, with 10
| > data elements allocated for the flexible array member.
| >
| > In the case of the (fake) flexible array member, you do not know
| > how large the object allocated from malloc was unless you can
| > track down the actual malloc call.
|
| Do you suppose the idiom is common enough that VRP could special-case
| "arrays of size 1 at the end of a struct" ?
it could be array of size 2, 3, 4, 5, ...
-- Gaby
