From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=1MSv=5J=arm.com=richard.sandiford@sourceware.org>
Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0653858C66
	for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:49:29 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 5E0653858C66
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14])
	by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF98AD7;
	Thu, 12 Jan 2023 08:50:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (e121540-lin.manchester.arm.com [10.32.99.50])
	by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7AA693F587;
	Thu, 12 Jan 2023 08:49:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: Jeff Law via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Jeff Law via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,  Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>, richard.sandiford@arm.com
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,  Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Default initialization of poly-ints
References: <87lemjx3zw.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
	<cd19e851-58e5-fc8b-60ab-a8633b19a0f6@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:49:27 +0000
In-Reply-To: <cd19e851-58e5-fc8b-60ab-a8633b19a0f6@gmail.com> (Jeff Law via
	Gcc's message of "Wed, 4 Jan 2023 13:30:56 -0700")
Message-ID: <mpttu0vu294.fsf@arm.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-31.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_NONE,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>

Jeff Law via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> On 1/3/23 04:16, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>> It seems that the default constructor of the non-POD poly-ints does
>> nothing.  Is this intentional?  I expected zero initialization, to match
>> regular ints.
> I think it was intentional.  Richard Sandiford would know for sure.  But 
> Martin Sebor might know as well since I think they discussed it at 
> length a little while back.

Yeah, it was intentional, to try to get -Wunitialized warnings.
But it predates C++11 being required, so = default would probably
be a better choice now.

Thanks,
Richard