| 15 Mar 2026 |
 dramforever | that is a good point but i don't want to audit the entire chromium source code to see if that 8 really was the only place it explodes | 06:12:15 |
| dramforever | * that is a good point but i don't want to audit the entire chromium source code to see if that single char[sizeof(uint64_t)] really was the only place it explodes | 06:12:30 |
| dramforever | because the symptom is "oops spurious out of bounds, guess i'm gonna die" when it's used | 06:12:53 |
 Vladimír Čunát | Yes, It would be nice to have evidence that strictflexarrays1 already is used in some larger distro-like setup. | 06:13:20 |
 emily | I mean we can just hardeningDisable Chromium | 06:16:38 |
| emily | so -fstrict-flex-arrays=1 allows [] but also [0] and [1] | 06:18:45 |
| emily | it's just the alignment hack here that's messing it up | 06:18:50 |
| emily | eh I guess I'm just repeating | 06:19:07 |
| dramforever | for now, but maybe there will be more breakages | 06:19:09 |
| dramforever | yeah i think we agree now | 06:19:29 |
| emily | it would be nice for chromium to not be doing wrong things though | 06:19:52 |
| dramforever | without relying on gnu extensions it gets ugly | 06:21:20 |
| dramforever | don't know if they want to | 06:21:31 |
| dramforever | * don't know if they want to just use char name[]; in c++ | 06:21:51 |
