On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 8:50 PM Bill Wendling <mo...@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 3:20 PM Martin Uecker <ma.uec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, dem 24.07.2025 um 15:06 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling:
> > > > constexpr size_t size = 4;
> > > > struct foo {
> > > > char (*buf)[size] __counted_by(size); // two different "size"!
> > > > int size;
> > > > };
> > >
> > > VLAs within structs are frustrating...
> >
> > This is not one.
> >
> 'constexpr' isn't a keyword in C.
HUH? It was added in C23 as a keyword.
> So I suppose what you wrote is
> supposed to be C++, which is beyond the scope of this RFC, because C++
> has scoping rules that are far more complex than C's, and also doesn't
> allow for VLA's in structs/classes. Without the 'constexpr' keyword,
> the above becomes a struct with a VLA in it. But all of this is
> besides the point. If we're worried about two different name
> resolutions because of a GNU-only feature, then we're getting off
> topic.
>
> -bw
