On Jan 11, 2008 12:34 PM, Steve Naroff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In any event, now I understand why EDG/NEILCC allow my original > example (but not the revised example).
I'm not sure I'm following... are EDG/NEILCC assuming that compound literals in initializers for static local variables have static storage duration? It doesn't appear to be a legal extension per the spec, because the spec explicitly states that because they are within a function body, such compound literals have automatic storage duration. clang could do the same thing as EDG/NEILCC's as an extension, since it doesn't break any compliant C99 programs, but it doesn't seem like an especially useful extension... -Eli _______________________________________________ cfe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
