From: Vegard Nossum <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 14:04:54 +0200
> Just out of curiosity, was this observed in practice? I could be
> wrong, but I was under the impression that using designated
> initializers would zero the rest of the struct, including padding.
I compiled testcases and found that the compiler does not zero out
padding when using designated initializers.
You can do the same.
For example, on sparc 32-bit, this code:
struct foo {
int a;
short b;
int c;
};
extern void foo(struct foo *);
void bar(void)
{
struct foo f = { .a = 1, .b = 2, .c = 3 };
foo(&f);
}
gives:
mov 1, %g1
st %g1, [%fp-12]
mov 2, %g1
sth %g1, [%fp-8]
mov 3, %g1
st %g1, [%fp-4]
It does not initialize the padding between 'b' and 'c'.
