https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101780
Bug ID: 101780
Summary: Missing initializers whereas structure has default
initializers
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: deco33000 at yandex dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
The issue is a false positive warning being issued whereas even if there are
missing initializers, the rest of the struct is default initialized.
// Type your code here, or load an example.
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
struct A {
union {
int i = 82, j;
};
int a = 98, b = 22;
};
int main() {
A polo = {.a = 45};
cout << polo.a << endl;
cout << polo.i << endl;
return 0;
}
warning: missing initializer for member 'A::<anonymous>'
[-Wmissing-field-initializers]
Try on godbolt:
https://godbolt.org/z/ohnWPqcE5
Can you confirm it is the intended behavior?
If so, could we make the message clearer, adding: "the following designated
fields X,Y,Z will be default initialized. P,Q,R are left uninitialized."
That way, it is much more useful as a warning, instead of making the dev fear
of undefined behavior, when there is not.
Thanks,
