jrtc27 added a comment. In D146847#4220721 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146847#4220721>, @schittir wrote:
> In D146847#4220697 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146847#4220697>, @jrtc27 wrote: > >> None of the other fields are initialised, so blindly initialising it alone >> to 0 here seems highly suspect. What's the actual case in which it's used >> whilst uninitialised? > > Coverity complains about SR.PolicyBitMask being uninitialized when calling > SemaRecords->push_back(SR) Isn't that precisely the case https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_222.htm makes legal? (Which I assume/hope applies equally to C++...) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146847/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146847 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
