|
| 1 | +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c89 -verify %s |
| 2 | +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c99 -verify %s |
| 3 | +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c11 -verify %s |
| 4 | +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c17 -verify %s |
| 5 | +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c23 -verify %s |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +// expected-no-diagnostics |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +/* WG14 ???: yes |
| 10 | + * new block scopes for selection and iteration statements |
| 11 | + * |
| 12 | + * This is referenced in the C99 front matter as new changes to C99, but it is |
| 13 | + * not clear which document number introduced the changes. It's possible this |
| 14 | + * is WG14 N759, based on discussion in the C99 rationale document that claims |
| 15 | + * these changes were made in response to surprising issues with the lifetime |
| 16 | + * of compound literals in compound statements vs non-compound statements. |
| 17 | + */ |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +enum {a, b}; |
| 20 | +void different(void) { |
| 21 | + if (sizeof(enum {b, a}) != sizeof(int)) |
| 22 | + _Static_assert(a == 1, ""); |
| 23 | + /* In C89, the 'b' found here would have been from the enum declaration in |
| 24 | + * the controlling expression of the selection statement, not from the global |
| 25 | + * declaration. In C99 and later, that enumeration is scoped to the 'if' |
| 26 | + * statement and the global declaration is what's found. |
| 27 | + */ |
| 28 | + #if __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L |
| 29 | + _Static_assert(b == 1, ""); |
| 30 | + #else |
| 31 | + _Static_assert(b == 0, ""); |
| 32 | + #endif |
| 33 | +} |
| 34 | + |
0 commit comments