On 21 December 2015 at 16:01, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:56:40PM -0800, Joe Stringer wrote: >> The previous definitions of these variables using designated >> initializers caused a variety of issues when attempting to compile with >> MSVC, particularly if including these headers from C++ code. By defining >> them like this, we can appease MSVC and keep the definitions the same on >> all platforms. >> >> VMware-BZ: #1517163 >> Suggested-by: Yin Lin <li...@vmware.com> >> Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org> > > Why not just use a new-enough MSVC? According to this discussion of the > topic, MSVC 2013 and newer support designated initializers in C++: > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18731707/why-does-c11-not-support-designated-initializer-list-as-c99
We have encountered this issue on MSVC2013u3 and MSVC2015u1. As far as I can tell, the compiler will accept them if it is compiling a .c file, but it fails if the header is included from a .cpp file. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
