Il 31/07/2012 10:47, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: >>> >> Why did you convert the initialisation to separate statement? If you >>> >> really want to do this, I think using g_new0 would be safer now, but I >>> >> actually like compound literals better. >> > >> > Later on I will have some more initialization beyond the list of fields, >> > so I preferred an explicit list. I can change it back if you prefer. > What I'm really interested in is having zero-initialisation for any not > explicitly initialised fields, just to be on the safe side. You can do > that with g_new0() or with compound literals, that's a matter of taste.
Yes, and in fact I even have a change to g_new0 later in the series. I'll squash that change in this patch. Paolo
