jrtc27 wrote: > > If you want __size_t you should just set it to __size_t. I don't see what > > the point of this approach is other than risking causing issues due to it > > not just being a plain specifier qualifier list. > > Because __size_t is not a keyword, it cannot be directly accessed through > user code.
So we're making __SIZE_TYPE__ be some magic type that you cannot name, only procure out of thin air through using sizeof? That doesn't seem like a good idea to me. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155979 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
