http://d.puremagic.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18


braddr@puremagic.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
          Component|www.digitalmars.com         |glue layer
            Product|D                           |GDC
         Resolution|FIXED                       |
            Version|0.148                       |0.17




------- Comment #4 from braddr@puremagic.com  2006-04-24 21:23 -------
Moving this bug over to gdc since the segv is still there and needs to be resolved.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18


braddr@puremagic.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|bugzilla@digitalmars.com    |braddr@puremagic.com
             Status|REOPENED                    |NEW




-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18


smjg@iname.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |smjg@iname.com




------- Comment #5 from smjg@iname.com  2006-05-09 09:59 -------
"A static array with a dimension of 0 is allowed, but no space is allocated for it. It's useful as the last member of a variable length struct, or as the degenerate case of a template expansion."

Still could be improved.  If it's the degenerate case of a template expansion, then you'd want the bounds checking to be still active.  If OTOH you're using it to make a variable length struct, then you'd want there to be no bounds checking ... unless the intention is to force the programmer to write array.ptr[42] instead of array[42].  So, are zero-length static arrays bounds-checked or not?


--