On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Nathan Froyd <nfr...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Nathan Froyd <froy...@mozilla.com> wrote: >>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/init.c b/gcc/cp/init.c >>> index c76460d..53d6133 100644 >>> --- a/gcc/cp/init.c >>> +++ b/gcc/cp/init.c >>> @@ -4038,6 +4038,15 @@ build_vec_init (tree base, tree maxindex, tree init, >>> } >>> } >>> >>> + /* Default-initialize scalar arrays directly. */ >>> + if (TREE_CODE (atype) == ARRAY_TYPE >>> + && SCALAR_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (atype)) >>> + && !init) >> >> This should check explicit_value_init._p rather than !init. And also >> check zero_init_p. > > Do you mean explicit_value_init_p && zero_init_p (atype)?
Yes. > zero_init_p > doesn't sound like the correct thing to use here, because it doesn't > take into account whether a class array type has a constructor. I am > probably misunderstanding the purpose of the zero_init_p check, > though. Since you're already checking for scalar type, we don't need to worry about classes. The zero_init_p check is to handle pointers to data members properly. Jason
