Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C as a Subset of C++ (or C++ as a superset of C)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:20:27 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <503C713B.2070400@loria.fr>
References: <k1ctl7$5uq$1@speranza.aioe.org> <503A62EC.5050909@spamsink.net> <IMadnRSuG7gZE6fNnZ2dnUVZ7vydnZ2d@lyse.net> <ln6285e4g9.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <503A9824.7050805@loria.fr> <v53tg9-fl3.ln1@jones.homeip.net> <lnd32capuh.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2590e4fa64e7931a8f955de6703c052f"; logging-data="16290"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+driMM3jZlYPi5P5IucEv3GYFvU2aAiRc="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0
In-Reply-To: <lnd32capuh.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:E2urexJ03cuPCmfmUdDgXcMic74=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:25197 comp.lang.c++:17969

Am 28.08.2012 01:15, schrieb Keith Thompson:
> lawrence.jones@siemens.com writes:
>> What good are pointers to VLAs without VLAs?  What would they point
>> to???
> 
> I suppose you could permit VLAs with allocated storage duration
> but not with automatic storage duration.  (They're already not
> permitted to have static storage duration.)  That would remove the
> case where you can define a VLA, but there's no way to handle an
> allocation failure.  It would also remove the case where they're
> most convenient.

I just don't agree on the last phrase. Pointers to VLA are very
convenient in function interfaces.

Jens

http://gustedt.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/dont-be-afraid-of-variably-modified-types/