A record which contains a flexible array member is itself a flexible
array member. A struct which contains such a record should also
consider itself to be a flexible array member.
llvm-svn: 218378
rules: instead of requiring flexible array members to be POD, require them to
be trivially-destructible. This seems to be the only constraint that actually
matters here (and even then, it's questionable whether this matters).
llvm-svn: 198983
Flexible array members only work out if they are the last field of a
record, however virtual bases would give us many situations where the
flexible array member would overlap with the virtual base fields.
It is unlikely in the extreme that this behavior was intended by the
user so raise a diagnostic instead of accepting. This is will not
reject conforming code because flexible array members are an extension
in C++ mode.
llvm-svn: 193920
David Majnemer