Re: Extra warning from gcc

[Francesco Potorti` <F dot Potorti at cnuce dot cnr dot it>]

     > missing initializers are very common and useful, and the language
     > guarantees that they are interpreted as 0.
   Yes.  That is why it is a warning, not an error.
   
     > Also, this new behaviour is not documented in the man page, and the only
     > apparent cure is to turn off -w, which is a pity.
   Some folks agree, others disagree.  The value of warnings will always be
   different from one developer to the next.  I don't like adding yet more
   options for something like this.

Yes, the  value of warnings  will always be  different, but we  are talking
about the -w  option, which groups many useful ones,  which cannot be taken
apart.  Am I the only one who routinely uses things like:

compressor compressors[] =
{
  { "z", "gzip -d -c"},
  { "Z", "gzip -d -c"},
  { "gz", "gzip -d -c"},
  { "GZ", "gzip -d -c"},
  { "bz2", "bzip2 -d -c" },
  { NULL }
};

or

int a[100] = { 0 };

and who would like to use -w as well?  I'd ask you to reconsider this
issue.

Thanks

-- 
Francesco Potort́ (researcher)         Voice:    +39-050-593 203 (op. 211)
Computer Networks Group                Fax:      +39-050-904052
CNUCE-CNR, Via Santa Maria 36          Email:    F.Potorti@cnuce.cnr.it
56126 Pisa - Italy                     Web:	 http://fly.cnuce.cnr.it/