On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 02:05:41PM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 10/4/19 1:44 PM, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>
> > macro exist in first place will be hard to remember. So, irrespective
> > in long run, {0} might get used in code and hence seems better
> > to just use {0} from start itself instead of macro/wrapper on top.
> >
> > Plus, even if someone starts out with thought {1} sets them all to ones,
> > I feel will soon realize by exercising the code isn't the reality.
>
> I wish ISO C had gone the same place gcc (and C++ ?) went, and allowed
> the initializer {}, which would eliminate any chance of it misleading
> a casual reader.
>
> If that were the case, I would be +1 on just using the {} syntax.
>
> But given that the standard is stuck on requiring a first element,
> I am +1 on using the macro, just to avoid giving any wrong impressions,
> even fleeting ones.
Yeah, it is certainly weird that you have to assign the first array
element to get the rest to be zeros. By using a macro, we can document
this behavior in one place.
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
