On 05/08/2015 02:34 PM, m-h-l wrote: > I guess you refer to this part of the standard: > > "The array-subscript [] and member-access . and -> operators, the address & > and indirection * unary operators, and pointer casts may be used in the > creation of an address constant, but the value of an object shall not be > accessed by use of these operators." I do. And that language is the same evenin C11. > Funny thing is that g++, ArmC and ICC do not have a problem with "abcdef"[3] > as an initializer. g++ is a different language. C++ constants are different. I don't know about ArmC and ICC. Perhaps it's an extension, or perhaps their authors didn't properly distinguish between C and C++. > So I wonder what shall be the sense to forbid this in gcc. It is the standard. > This way I cannot use gcc to calculate e.g. CRCs or Hashs over real constant > things at build time without extra tools, even not in such a clear case as > here. With the other compilers its no problem. Well, you can regret writing in C if you like. But don't argue with us: argue with the authors of the standard. Complaining about a language standard to people who didn't write it is the height of futility. If you want C++, write in C++. Or find some other way around it. Andrew.
