Re: [PATCH 0/7] Silence even more W=2 warnings

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 07:37:19PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> Most of the others come from null-entry table initializations, i.e. {
> 0 }, which give missing field initializer warnings.

I'd suggest that such initializers should just be {}, not { 0 }, and we
should teach compilers to specifically *not* complain about empty
initializers even when otherwise complaining about missing fields.
Initializing a structure to 0 is completely sensible.

- Josh Triplett
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [LKML]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Trinity Fuzzer Tool]

  Powered by Linux