🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9225302.22791@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus James HENDERSON) writes:
>First, a question for comp.std.c:
>is the following a legal (strictly conforming) program?
>       struct S { unsigned:0; }
>       int main() { return sizeof(S); }

No.  ANSI C section 3.5.2.1, page 61 lines 25 to 26:  "If the
struct-declaration-list contains no named members, the behavior is undefined."

>Secondly, some comments about C++.
>In ANSI C, pointer comparisons between pointers to unrelated objects (ie.
>objects that are not both members of the same aggregate) cause undefined
>behavior, I believe. For example, the following program
>       #include <assert.h>
>       int main() {
>               int x,y;
>               assert(&x != &y);
>       }
>should cause undefined behavior. [Is this correct?]

No.  For relational operators (<, >, <=, >=) that would be correct.
For equality operators (==, !=) the result is defined.  Comparing whether
a pointer is equal to a null pointer or not is a common operation, and
(unless miscoded in some other way) is defined.

I don't have modern documents on C++ and don't dare to answer your later
questions.  For the same reason, this answer is not cross-posted.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@jit081.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
"Yeah -- bad wiring.  That was probably it.  Very bad."