On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 3:20 PM Martin Uecker <ma.uec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 24.07.2025 um 15:06 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling:
> > > constexpr size_t size = 4;
> > > struct foo {
> > > char (*buf)[size] __counted_by(size); // two different "size"!
> > > int size;
> > > };
> >
> > VLAs within structs are frustrating...
>
> This is not one.
>
'constexpr' isn't a keyword in C. So I suppose what you wrote is
supposed to be C++, which is beyond the scope of this RFC, because C++
has scoping rules that are far more complex than C's, and also doesn't
allow for VLA's in structs/classes. Without the 'constexpr' keyword,
the above becomes a struct with a VLA in it. But all of this is
besides the point. If we're worried about two different name
resolutions because of a GNU-only feature, then we're getting off
topic.
-bw
