It may be correct in this case, but "simple matter of" can sometimes
mask a real problem. If the function expected the value to be set
earlier, but the analysis tool finds a path where it's not set, there
could be a more real bug.
Is zero the right value? Why not, 1, -1, or 42?
=0 may be perfectly good in this case. But beware of quick code fixes
to silence compiler warnings.
On 7/21/2015 5:56 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
If it's a simple matter of adding "=0" in the declaration, we should just fix
the darn thing.
_______________________________________________
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
