On Tue, 7 Aug 2018, Martin Sebor wrote: > 2) skipping embedded nuls made it possible to create a string > with fewer elements than the initializer array, which caused > arrays with unspecified bound to be smaller than they would > have been otherwise
I think there should be explicit tests of sizeof for arrays with unspecified bound - to make sure both that it isn't any smaller than it should be, but also that any NULs implicitly added for a STRING_CST don't make the arrays any larger than their size should be for the originally given initializer that doesn't have a 0 as the last element. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
