On 04/10/2016 07:14 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ if (TREE_CODE (type) == ARRAY_TYPE
+ && variably_modified_type_p (type, NULL_TREE)
+ && !processing_template_decl)
+ {
+ /* Statically check for overflow in VLA bounds and build
+ an expression that checks at runtime whether the VLA
+ is erroneous due to invalid (runtime) bounds.
+ Another expression to check for excess initializers
+ is built in build_vec_init. */
Why do this both in check_initializer and then again in cp_finish_decl
right after the call to check_initializer?
+ /* Also check to see if the final array size is zero (the size
+ is unsigned so the earlier overflow check detects negative
+ values as well. */
+ tree zerocheck = fold_build2 (EQ_EXPR, boolean_type_node,
+ vlasize, size_zero_node);
I'm not sure whether we want this, given that GCC allows zero-length
arrays in general. As I recall, with the C++14 stuff whether we checked
for zero was dependent on flag_iso, though I wasn't particularly happy
with that. If you want to check this unconditionally that's fine.
Jason
