------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-02 08:10 -------
Confirmed.
/* Do not warn if this level of the initializer uses member
designators; it is likely to be deliberate. */
if (constructor_unfilled_fields && !constructor_designated)
I think we forget to push/pop the context for compound literals.
Here is another testcase where we warn:
struct foo {
char *p;
int i;
int j;
} bar = {
.j = 1,
.p = (char[]){"abc"}
};
And one where we don't as the order of the compound literal has changed:
struct foo {
char *p;
int i;
int j;
} bar = {
.p = (char[]){"abc"},
.j = 1
};
-----
Here is an even more complex testcase where we warn too much:
struct h
{
int x, y;
};
struct g
{
struct h *i;
int j;
};
struct foo {
struct g *v;
int i1;
int j1;
} bar = {
&(struct g) {
.i = &(struct h){1}
}
};
------------------------------------
t.c:16: warning: missing initializer
t.c:16: warning: (near initialization for (anonymous).y)
t.c:17: warning: missing initializer
t.c:17: warning: (near initialization for (anonymous).j)
t.c:18: warning: missing initializer
t.c:18: warning: (near initialization for bar.i1)
We should not warn about (anonymous).j.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC build triplet|i386-portbld-freebsd7.0 |
GCC host triplet|i386-portbld-freebsd7.0 |
GCC target triplet|i386-portbld-freebsd7.0 |
Keywords| |diagnostic
Known to fail| |2.95 3.2.3 3.4.0 4.0.0 4.2.0
| |4.0.4 4.1.2 4.2.0 4.3.0
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-12-02 08:10:07
date| |
Summary|Compound literal in |Compound literal in
|structure initializer causes|structure initializer causes
|irrelevant warning |missing initializer warning
| |to happen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30006
