🚀 go-pugleaf

fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) wrote:


>>IMHO the most important reason to disallow RT-sized arrays
>>is that then sizeof also becomes a RT-size.

>A fair point -- but would that really cause any problems?

Unless I'm missing something, a run-time version of sizeof would likely
have to evaluate its argument, so you'd basically end up with two
different sizeof's - one that happened at compile time, didn't evaluate
its argument and allowed use of expressions that can't be evaluated
legally.

It'd be interesting of anybody from Metaware were to jump in on this one
- their Direct to SOM system on OS/2 already does run-time evaluation of
sizeof at least part of the time, so their information on the subject
would be less speculative than mine.
    Later,
    Jerry.

/* I can barely express my own opinions; I certainly can't
 * express anybody else's.
 *
 * The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
 */


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]