------- 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
