From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-41582-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1OSwJt-00053L-JH
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:11:05 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 401FDE0967;
	Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:11:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx75.mail.ru (mx75.mail.ru [94.100.176.90])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A754E089B
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:10:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [85.26.234.156] (port=48934 helo=localhost)
	by mx75.mail.ru with asmtp 
	id 1OSwJb-000LXX-00
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:10:52 +0400
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:10:27 +0400
From: dev-random@mail.ru
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: FYI:  Rules for distro-friendly packages
Message-ID: <20100627181027.GA19713@laptop>
References: <20100626205001.365b51cb@snowcone>
 <20100626195733.GF4789@nibiru.local>
 <20100626211254.002784d4@snowcone>
 <i06ouu$eos$1@dough.gmane.org>
 <20100627104724.GC23460@nibiru.local>
 <i07e9t$356$1@dough.gmane.org>
 <20100627122258.GA8754@boostbox>
 <i07o8g$ug0$1@dough.gmane.org>
 <20100627171454.GA2656@boostbox>
 <i082ss$v2j$1@dough.gmane.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <i082ss$v2j$1@dough.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Spam: Not detected
X-Mras: Ok
X-Archives-Salt: 505d6b89-1ca0-4270-9089-ab7ec41fa264
X-Archives-Hash: ef5514c1db60c83a0e026811eb7bda41

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:48:25PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> ...
> It is allowed.  Section 7.1.1, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the C++ standard:
> ...

Not in C.
ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (aka C99), section 6.7.1, note 101:
> The implementation may treat any register declaration simply as an auto
> declaration. However, whether or not addressable storage is actually
> used, the address of any part of an object declared with storage-class
> specifier register cannot be computed, either explicitly (by use of the
> unary & operator as discussed in 6.5.3.2) or implicitly (by converting
> an array name to a pointer as discussed in 6.3.2.1). Thus, the only
> operator that can be applied to an array declared with storage-class
> specifier register is sizeof.