https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065
--- Comment #30 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> --- On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, ch3root at openwall dot com wrote: > 4. From the POV of the standard I don't see much difference between VLA > and ordinary arrays in this question. AFAICT the standard doesn't place > limits on constructed types of any kind and hence oversized types are > permitted by the standard. See comment #3 (or pr68107) for a practical "permitted by" only in the sense of "the standard does not require implementations to reject them". It is not intended that the listed implementation limits are the only limits that there may be, at compile time or run time. > 3. The same for sizes of objects. There is an environmental limit for > "bytes in an object" but it's marked as "(in a hosted environment > only)". So there is no such limit in the standard for a freestanding > implementation, right? But I doubt that you are supposed to be able to No, what's "in a hosted environment only" is the requirement that the implementation translate and execute some program with a 65535-byte object (and an instance of the other given limits, simultaneously); freestanding implementations may have an object size limit smaller than 65535 bytes. That is, effectively, C99 and above do not support hosted environments with a 16-bit address space; systems with a 16-bit address space are only supported for freestanding implementations.
