Monolith compile verify.c

[Michael Mueller]

Thank you so much for the replies. I appreciate the effort, time, and
detail.

Turns out the warning is created by:
-Wextra

Only occurs in the older compiler (which we are required to use).

Removing the compiler flag worked.

Thanks again,
Mike

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 9:42 AM Michael Wojcik <Michael.Wojcik at microfocus.com>
wrote:

> > From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-bounces at openssl.org] On
> Behalf Of
> > Matt Caswell
> > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 04:51
> >
> > On 24/06/2020 20:20, Michael Mueller wrote:
> > >
> > > Questions
> > >
> > > 1. Is the fix valid?
> >
> > Seems ok, but it looks like the compiler warning is a bit over zealous.
>
> It's valid, but I'd argue it's not a "fix".
>
> As Rich Salz pointed out, omitting initializers is permitted by the C
> standard. In fact it's endorsed, in the sense that the standard makes this
> behavior explicit (see e.g. ISO 9899-1999 6.7.8 #21 for arrays, or in the
> case of subobjects #19), and the Rationale (I'm referring to 5.10,
> published 2003) does not discourage its use, as it does for e.g. omitting
> braces for compound object initializers and relying on the mandated
> top-down-parse semantics.
>
> In his monumental /The New C Standard: An Economic and Cultural
> Commentary/ (2005), Derek M. Jones comments on this aspect of the language
> by noting some costs involved in requiring all members be explicitly
> initialized, and concludes: " Given these costs and the fact that
> developers are generally aware of the default behavior, there does not
> appear to be a worthwhile benefit in a guideline recommending that the
> behavior be made explicit." (1669) The GCC developers (like all C
> implementors) would have done well to read Jones.
>
> > We have the same pattern in many parts of the code I think without
> problems.
>
> Yes, as it should be.
>
> > > 2.  If fix is valid, what are the chances of getting the change
> accepted?
> >
> > Doubtful.
>
> And I'd say that's appropriate. Some of the GCC developers would prefer
> programmers use a language which is similar to, but distinctly not C,
> eschewing useful constructs and employing various others which are not part
> of the C language. OpenSSL is written in C.
>
> --
> Michael Wojcik
> Distinguished Engineer, Micro Focus
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20200625/424ba7eb/attachment.html>