On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 06:42:53AM +0900, Neil Booth wrote:
> > such a big deal... Parser would need to accept
> > ident ( \[ expr \] | . ident )*
>
> don't forget -> if you're going to accept extra stuff. GCC forgot ->
> with the parser rewrite, yes I filed a PR.
In offsetof() second argument??? Ah, hell... You mean the situations
like offsetof(struct foo, x->a) in
struct foo {
struct {
int a;
} x[10];
};
OK...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Segher Boessenkool <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- From: Neil Booth <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch 1/3] add the fsblock layer
- Next by Date: [PATCH][ISDN] fix possible NULL deref on low memory condition in capidrv.c::send_message()
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions
- Index(es):
 |