[PATCH] dlls/windows.globalization: don't allocate a partial structure

[Rémi Bernon]

On 3/23/22 19:40, Rémi Bernon wrote:
> On 3/23/22 14:05, Eric Pouech wrote:
>>
>>> Well I think this makes the code very bloated, and if it is truly UB 
>>> then we should instead find a way to use 0-sized arrays in a portable 
>>> way.
>>>
>>> I believe 0 sized array for the last struct member is standard C99, 
>>> so is there any compiler not supporting it yet (or some variation of 
>>> it like with empty size)?
>>
>> yes the so called "flexible array member" is c99 and seems to be 
>> supported by gcc, clang, msvc
>>
>> but they don't seem to be accepted directly into wine (for now) (for 
>> example include/winnt.h see 
>> https://source.winehq.org/source/include/winnt.h#5815)
>>
>> (there are a few others instances in the same way)
>>
>>
>> there are a couple of 0-length array instances (mosts of them 
>> protected by #ifdef _GNUC and fallback with 1 length array)
>>
>> (and wine/msvcpdb.h uses them directly w/o fallbacks...)
>>
>>
>> I did a previous attempt with 0 length array for this but it never 
>> landed 
>> (https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2022-February/207793.html)
>>
>>
>> so I'd wait for Alexandre's guidance on this
>>
>> A+
>>
> 
> C99 flexible array is with empty size, not 0.
> 
>  From https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/nc6xGM5nh I don't see any compiler not 
> supporting even both methods, though -pedantic emits a warning with 0 
> size (empty size is fine).
> 
> It only tests some old GCC / Clang version as they don't provide old 
> MSVC but maybe it's okay?

Note that it is not valid C++, so I don't think we can safely use it in 
public headers.
-- 
Rémi Bernon <rbernon at codeweavers.com>