================
@@ -2363,8 +2356,11 @@ void InitListChecker::CheckStructUnionTypes(
}
// Emit warnings for missing struct field initializers.
- if (!VerifyOnly && InitializedSomething && CheckForMissingFields &&
- !RD->isUnion()) {
+ // This check is disabled for designated initializers in C.
+ // This matches gcc behaviour.
+ if (!VerifyOnly && InitializedSomething && !RD->isUnion() &&
+ !IList->isIdiomaticZeroInitializer(SemaRef.getLangOpts()) &&
+ !(HasDesignatedInit && !SemaRef.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)) {
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
I'm not asking to add a level/'if'. I'm asking for declaring a set of bools
above this 'if' that better reflect what is being tested. With
HasDesignatedInit/CPlusPlus checks only being vaguely related, and the 'sort'
of the checks not really being clear, I am asking for the list of '!'s to be
shorter/grouped into a couple of 'bools' with descriptive names.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81364
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
