RE: Proposal: Add more compile-time asserts to expose inconsistencies.

> It seems to me that there is a good point to be consistent with the treatment of StaticAssertStmt and StaticAssertExpr in c.h, which have fallback implementations in *all* the configurations supported.

Consistency is good, but:

* That is beyond the scope for what I wanted my patch to achieve; my use-cases are C code only

* It is too risky for me to simply cut/paste my C version of StaticAssertDecl and hope it will work OK for C++. It needs lots of testing because there seems evidence that bad things can happen. E.g. Peter Eisentraut wrote "if you're asking, why is the fallback implementation in C++ different from the one in C, then that's because the C variant didn't work in C++."

~

I am happy if somebody else with more ability to test C++ properly wants to add the __cplusplus variant of the new macro.

Meanwhile, I've attached latest re-based version of this patch.

Kind Regards.
--
Peter Smith
Fujitsu Australia