jyknight added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.rst:2644 + +Control which arrays are considered as flexible arrays members. <arg> +can be 1 (array of size 0, 1 and undefined are considered), 2 (array of size 0 ---------------- Docs should also mention what the default -fno-strict-flex-arrays means -- that ALL sizes of trailing arrays are considered flexible array members. (I'm amazed that's the rule, and I never knew it. I always thought the special casing for FAMs was restricted to sizes 0 and 1!) Also, since apparently different parts of the compiler have been (and will now continue to) use different default behaviors, may want to document that as well. I'm sure I don't know what the rules actually are intended to be here. E.g. that a macro-expansion of the size arg disables the special-behavior for [1] is extremely surprising! ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:15804 + + // FIXME: we should also allow Size = 0 here per the definition of + // StrictFlexArraysLevel, but that's backward incompatible with previous clang ---------------- Presumably the size-zero/unsized cases are already being taken care of elsewhere in the code? I find it hard to believe we are currently emitting diagnostics for size-0 FAM which we don't emit for size-1 FAM? ================ Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/array-bounds-strict-flex-arrays.cpp:9 + } s2; + s2.a[2] = 0; // no-warning +} ---------------- Except we actually _do_ know the bounds of the full-object and ought to be able to warn on this code anyhow... Better to have the test function accept a pointer, so that's not a conflating issue? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D126864 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
