On 22 Feb 2016, at 10:56, David Chisnall <thera...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 19 Feb 2016, at 23:23, Dimitry Andric <d...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> This warning is only produced when you use -Wall -W, and then initialize
>> structs partially, i.e. you initialize some fields but not others. I
>> think this is a quite reasonable warning for a high warning level.
>
> The warning is annoying in many ways. You ought to be able to zero
> initialise any struct with {0}, but clang objects if you do this and requires
> every field to be filled in. This warning really shouldn’t be enabled with
> -Wall, because it has too hight a false positive rate.
It isn't, it is in -W (a.k.a -Wextra). But gcc also warns in this case. E.g.
if I use this example:
struct foo {
int i;
int j;
} bar[] = {
{ 42 },
{ 43 }
};
I get the following warnings from gcc -Wextra:
$ gcc -Wextra -c initializers.c
initializers.c:5:2: warning: missing initializer for field 'j' of 'struct foo'
[-Wmissing-field-initializers]
{ 42 },
^
initializers.c:3:6: note: 'j' declared here
int j;
^
initializers.c:6:2: warning: missing initializer for field 'j' of 'struct foo'
[-Wmissing-field-initializers]
{ 43 }
^
initializers.c:3:6: note: 'j' declared here
int j;
^
Note that the warnings disappear if C99 initializers are used.
-Dimitry
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
