------- Comment #2 from mankatob at yahoo dot com 2006-12-12 13:52 ------- Subject: Re: gcc/vec.h line 538 references "vec" which is undefined (should be vec_)
If its already spec'd - why are we "calculating" it? Did something change between when it was defined and vec.h 538? Since the offset is inherent - is it possible that this routine is never used (it is unnecessarily obfuscated in macro-ese). --- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot > org 2006-12-08 21:33 ------- > offsetof (VEC(T,base),vec) > > I see this: > typedef struct VEC(T,B) > \ > { > \ > unsigned num; > \ > unsigned alloc; > \ > T vec[1]; > \ > } VEC(T,B) > > > There forgo this is invalid, we are looking for the > offsetof of the vec element > in VEC(T, base). > > > -- > > pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: > > What |Removed > |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Status|UNCONFIRMED > |RESOLVED > Resolution| > |INVALID > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30124 > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30124