On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > 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.
Any update? Jason
