Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!purdue!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: X3J11 Pleasanton meeting summary
Keywords: X3J11 Pleasanton meeting C standard interpretations
Message-ID: <14173@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 17 Oct 90 21:23:38 GMT
References: <13996@smoke.BRL.MIL> <3427@mcrware.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 23

In article <3427@mcrware.UUCP> jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) writes:
-In article <13996@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
->	struct foo x;
->	struct foo { int i; };
->	/* the above is strictly conforming; incomplete-type objects can
->	   be defined, so long as by the end of the translation unit the
->	   type becomes complete so that storage can then be allocated */
-If this is the current interpretation, then it is not consistent with the
-"Semantics" portion of section 3.5 (lines 30-31, p.70), which states

Where did you get your copy of the Standard?  Your page numbers don't
agree with mine.

-"If an identifier for an object is declared with no linkage, the type
-for the object shall be complete by the end of its declarator, or by
-the end of its init-declarator if it has an initializer."

I don't know why you think that this would apply.  The object "x" in
my example has external linkage.

-So...does this reflect an official change in the standard?

Of course not.  X3J11 is not in a position to change the standard now.