On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, Joe Perches wrote:

On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 20:17 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, Joe Perches wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 05:27 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2021-08-05 at 13:43 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:

quoted

The "= {};" style empty struct initializer is preferred over = {0}.
It avoids the situation where the first struct member is a pointer and
that generates a Sparse warning about assigning using zero instead of
NULL.  Also it's just nicer to look at.

Perhaps a cocci script like the below could help too:

$ cat zero_init_struct.cocci
@@
identifier name;
identifier t;
@@

	struct name t = {
-	       0
	};

@@
identifier name;
identifier t;
identifier member;
@@

	struct name t = {
	       ...,
		.member = {
-		0
		},
		...,
	};

My test turns up over 1900 occurrences.  There is the question of whether
{} or { } is preferred.  The above semantic patch replaces {0} by {} and
( 0 } by { }.

I saw that and I don't recall how to force one style or another
to be output.

If you remove something and put it back, then Coccinelle takes care of
pretty printing it.  So the following produces {} everywhere.  Fortunately
Dan seems to prefer that...

@@
identifier name;
identifier t;
@@

        struct name t =
-              {0}
+              {}
        ;

@@
identifier name;
identifier t;
identifier member;
@@

        struct name t = {
               ...,
                .member =
-               {0}
+               {}
                ,
                ...,
        };

julia