On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 08:35:12PM +0000, Qing Zhao wrote: > One of the major purposes of the new option -fstrict-flex-array is to > encourage standard conforming programming style. > > So, it might be reasonable to treat -fstrict-flex-array similar as -pedantic > (but only for flexible array members)? > If so, then issuing warnings when the standard doesn’t support is reasonable > and desirable.
I guess the point is that "-std=c89 -fstrict-flex-arrays=3" leaves "[]" available for use still? I think this doesn't matter. If someone wants it to be really strict, they'd just add -Wpedantic. -- Kees Cook
