From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <43a5572d-ea50-41a8-9897-9900f13c5a00@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <43a5572d-ea50-41a8-9897-9900f13c5a00@www.fastmail.com> From: Kyohei Kadota Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 23:52:19 +0900 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] Don't Plan 9 C compiler initialize the rest of member of a struct? Topicbox-Message-UUID: f8331b5e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Thank you for a reply. I read spec on http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/WG14/www/docs/n1256.pdf then I'm confusing. This spec describes Initialization: > 6.7.8 Initialization, p127 > > 19 The initialization shall occur in initializer list order, each initial= izer provided for a > particular subobject overriding any previously listed initializer for the= same subobject;132) > all subobjects that are not initialized explicitly shall be initialized i= mplicitly the same as > objects that have static storage duration. What is "be initialized implicitly the same as objects that have static storage duration" mean? 2019=E5=B9=B44=E6=9C=882=E6=97=A5(=E7=81=AB) 9:27 Jeremy O'Brien : > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, at 11:33, Kyohei Kadota wrote: > > Hi, 9fans. I use 9legacy. > > > > About below program, I expected that flags field will initialize to > > zero but the value of flags was a garbage, ex, "f8f7". > > Is this expected? > > > > ``` > > #include > > > > struct option { > > int n; > > char *s; > > int flags; > > }; > > > > int > > main(void) > > { > > struct option opt =3D {1, "test"}; > > printf("%d %s %x\n", opt.n, opt.s, opt.flags); > > return 0; > > } > > ``` > > > > > > According to C99: "If an object that has automatic storage duration is no= t initialized explicitly, its value is indeterminate." > > Stack variable =3D=3D automatic storage duration. This appears to be corr= ect behavior to me. >