Thank you so much for the replies. I appreciate the effort, time, and detail.
Turns out the warning is created by: -Wextra Only occurs in the older compiler (which we are required to use). Removing the compiler flag worked. Thanks again, Mike On Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 9:42 AM Michael Wojcik <michael.woj...@microfocus.com> wrote: > > From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On > Behalf Of > > Matt Caswell > > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 04:51 > > > > On 24/06/2020 20:20, Michael Mueller wrote: > > > > > > Questions > > > > > > 1. Is the fix valid? > > > > Seems ok, but it looks like the compiler warning is a bit over zealous. > > It's valid, but I'd argue it's not a "fix". > > As Rich Salz pointed out, omitting initializers is permitted by the C > standard. In fact it's endorsed, in the sense that the standard makes this > behavior explicit (see e.g. ISO 9899-1999 6.7.8 #21 for arrays, or in the > case of subobjects #19), and the Rationale (I'm referring to 5.10, > published 2003) does not discourage its use, as it does for e.g. omitting > braces for compound object initializers and relying on the mandated > top-down-parse semantics. > > In his monumental /The New C Standard: An Economic and Cultural > Commentary/ (2005), Derek M. Jones comments on this aspect of the language > by noting some costs involved in requiring all members be explicitly > initialized, and concludes: " Given these costs and the fact that > developers are generally aware of the default behavior, there does not > appear to be a worthwhile benefit in a guideline recommending that the > behavior be made explicit." (1669) The GCC developers (like all C > implementors) would have done well to read Jones. > > > We have the same pattern in many parts of the code I think without > problems. > > Yes, as it should be. > > > > 2. If fix is valid, what are the chances of getting the change > accepted? > > > > Doubtful. > > And I'd say that's appropriate. Some of the GCC developers would prefer > programmers use a language which is similar to, but distinctly not C, > eschewing useful constructs and employing various others which are not part > of the C language. OpenSSL is written in C. > > -- > Michael Wojcik > Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus > >
