On Wed, 2023-12-06 at 13:24 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I wonder if this part isn't too pedantic or more of a code style. > Some packages fail to build with this with -Werror because they do > struct S *p = calloc (sizeof (struct S), 1); > or similar. It is true that calloc arguments are documented to be > nmemb, size, but given sufficient alignment (which is not really different > between either order of arguments) isn't it completely valid to allocate > char array with sizeof (struct S) elements and then store a struct S object > into it?
In PR112364 Martin Uecker has pointed out the alignment may be different with the different order of arguments, per C23 (N2293). With earlier versions of the standard some people believe the alignment should not be different, while the other people disagree (as the text is not very clear). -- Xi Ruoyao <xry...@xry111.site> School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
