jyknight wrote: - In C89: it's impossible to get the address of a temporary struct, so the lifetime is irrelevant. - In C99: you now can get the address (from an array subobject), but the lifetime was defined as "until the next sequence point". This made it technically illegal to access even non-array subobjects from a temporary struct in many cases where it seems like it should be fine and was in C89. - In C11, the lifetime was _extended_ to be the containing full expression.
(LMK if I've got that wrong!) Given that, how is the C11 change a breaking change? It seems like the C99 rule was just bogus, and we should forget it ever existed? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133472 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
