Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> On 5/27/21 1:46 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> > Yet another portable solution is:
> >
> > static mbstate_t s1;
> > mbstate_t s = s1;
> >
> > also with its own form of ugliness.
>
> I did that years ago, but compilers complained about it when I made s1
> 'const', and I vaguely recall complaints even when it wasn't 'const'
> ("What? You're declaring a static variable that is always zero and never
> changes? That must be a bug!!").
>
> At this point I wouldn't worry about the older clang and gcc versions
> that complain about {0} as an initializer. We can either let them die
> off noisily, or use the appropriate -Wno-whatever option when using them
> to compile.
I've decided to just not worry about it. It's impossible to compile
without warnings on every single C compiler in the world.
Thanks,
Arnold
