Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed the following disagreement between gnulib and coreutils:
--- gnulib/lib/canon-host.c 2005-05-13 23:03:57 -0700
+++ cu/lib/canon-host.c 2005-05-14 00:58:06 -0700
...
I assume that this was due to a warning from gcc -W about a missing
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The extra comma is an indication to the reader that we know there are
missing zeros, and don't care. This style can be used for any object
in C89, e.g.:
mbstate_t initial_state = { 0, };
where we don't know whether mbstate_t is a structure, or an
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The extra comma is an indication to the reader that we know there are
missing zeros, and don't care. This style can be used for any object
in C89, e.g.:
mbstate_t initial_state = { 0, };
where we don't
On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 01:16:50PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I recall some compilers complaining about a trailing ','s. Is it
really OK by C89? I'm just curious.
Oddly, it's different for array initialisers and enums, but I can't
remember which is allowed and which is not.
James.
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I recall some compilers complaining about a trailing ','s. Is it
really OK by C89? I'm just curious.
Yes, it is allowed in C89.
Perhaps you're thinking of enumeration specifiers. The declaration:
enum { zero, };
is not allowed in C89. (C99
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I recall some compilers complaining about a trailing ','s. Is it
really OK by C89? I'm just curious.
Yes, it is allowed in C89.
Perhaps you're thinking of enumeration specifiers. The declaration:
enum {
I noticed the following disagreement between gnulib and coreutils:
--- gnulib/lib/canon-host.c 2005-05-13 23:03:57 -0700
+++ cu/lib/canon-host.c 2005-05-14 00:58:06 -0700
@@ -54,8 +54,9 @@ canon_host (char const *host)
#if HAVE_GETADDRINFO
{
-struct addrinfo hint = { 0 };
+
