From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <musl-return-20672-ml=inbox.vuxu.org@lists.openwall.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,
	RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: from second.openwall.net (second.openwall.net [193.110.157.125])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD39622037
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:36:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: (qmail 17591 invoked by uid 550); 19 Mar 2024 21:32:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 17550 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2024 21:32:04 -0000
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:36:41 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: NRK <nrk@disroot.org>
Cc: =?utf-8?B?SuKCkeKCmeKCmw==?= Gustedt <jens.gustedt@inria.fr>,
	musl@lists.openwall.com, Mike Cui <cuicui@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20240319213640.GN4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
References: <20240318213441.GH4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <627epdel4gidvu46u5ua2mclieqy3wwqbs7sxjgtgrsmkvn4up@ehu5ru6micnr>
 <CAMbjb12WQL+DQSP0xXy84fNTEGTbE2DX1=oX-Wc_s2wyRAxypg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240319131833.GI4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <CAMbjb13m8_+FHRfOV5M3ff6nf1iT=2Rk4mzom55FZArqAYUEdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240319154222.GK4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <CAMbjb13VDdiGWsx0jHx5GniNp9OyMiM0LL0muXsqeK+ZYdoLJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240319160832.GL4163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20240319173930.57b8eb30@inria.fr>
 <gjidsps4d2umlyfewoytiucpjb34i3zdcvd7txfovki45c5757@7d2gz6zlmipa>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <gjidsps4d2umlyfewoytiucpjb34i3zdcvd7txfovki45c5757@7d2gz6zlmipa>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [musl] Potential bug in __res_msend_rc() wrt to union
 initialization.

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 09:04:41PM +0000, NRK wrote:
> > actually the introduction of `{}` versus `{0}` in C23 was not meant to
> > provide any difference in semantics, just to make the syntax nicer and
> > consistent with C++.
> 
> Regardless of what the intention was, the reality is that it *does* have
> semantic difference. Specifically, empty initialization `{}` benefits
> from the default initialization rules, which specify zero-ing out the
> padding bits whereas `{0}` doesn't guarantee that.

That's simply not true. There is no difference in the rules as
specified by the standard.

Rich