Weddington, Eric wrote:
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.
My ColdFire gcc is from CodeSourcery - it is not the latest version, but
it is from the right people.
It might not count strictly as a bug, since I don't think there is any
clear definition of how much space a stand-alone zero length array
should take. Since there is nothing you can actually /do/ with such
arrays, they are not going to be used much - it is quite easy to believe
that no one has noticed this behaviour in any version of gcc for any target.
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
