On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:59 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Here is an updated version of the patch.
>
> My reading of C23 is that if some aggregate field is initialized with
> {} (which is supposed to newly clear padding bits) and then its
> subobjects are overridden with designated initiali
On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 11:08:03PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c.jj 2024-10-15
> > > 16:14:23.411063701 +0200
> > > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c 2024-10-15
> > > 16:31:02.302984714
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 11:08:03PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c.jj2024-10-15
> > 16:14:23.411063701 +0200
> > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c 2024-10-15
> > 16:31:02.302984714 +0200
> > @@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
> > +/* Test GNU C11
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c.jj 2024-10-15
> 16:14:23.411063701 +0200
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gnu11-empty-init-1.c 2024-10-15 16:31:02.302984714
> +0200
> @@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
> +/* Test GNU C11 support for empty initializers. */
Hi!
Here is an updated version of the patch.
My reading of C23 is that if some aggregate field is initialized with
{} (which is supposed to newly clear padding bits) and then its
subobjects are overridden with designated initializers, then the
padding bits are cleared property should be kept unle
