--- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-26 23:14 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Subject: Re: wrong result
>
> "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > anther, consider an example definite[2] of 'offsetof', if you think
> | > that is undefine
--- Comment #4 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2007-01-05 21:11
---
Subject: Re: wrong result
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > anther, consider an example definite[2] of 'offsetof', if you think
| > that is undefined, it's almost impossible to
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-05 20:13 ---
> anther, consider an example definite[2] of 'offsetof', if you think
> that is undefined, it's almost impossible to give a definite of
> offsetof.
> #define offsetof(TYPE,MEMBER) ((size_t)&((TYPE*)0)->MEMBER)
Th
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-05 05:23 ---
Actually this is undefined by the C standard as you are deferencing a null
pointer, yes &a->b is implemented as a pointer arthematic but it is still a
deferencing according to the C standard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #1 from lidaobing at gmail dot com 2007-01-04 14:25 ---
orignal reported by RoachCock in newsmth.net BBS
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30368
