🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <14383@ksr.com> jfw@ksr.com (John F. Woods) writes:
: "A declaration of an identifier for an object that has file scope without an
: initializer, and without a storage-class specifier or with the storage-class
: specifier *static*, constitutes a _tentative_definition_.  If a translation
: unit contains one or more tentative definitions for an identifier, and the
: translation unit contains no external definition for that identifier, then
: the behavior is exactly as if the translation unit contains a file scope
: declaration of that identifier, with the composite type as of the end of the
: translation unit, with an initializer equal to 0.

This is the wording in the draft.

: I suppose it might be considered a problem that 3.7.2 specifies that the
: initializer is "equal to 0", which might or might not be seen as equal to
: "{0}" as is necessary to initialize an array,

That is exactly the problem.

:                                               but I think the clarification
: under "Semantics" in 3.5.7 ("If an object that has static storage duration
: is not initialized explicitly, it is initialized implicitly as if every
: member that has arithmetic type were assigned 0 and every member that has
: pointer type were assigned a null pointer constant.") adequately blesses
: the necessary interpretation.

Unfortunately not. 3.7.2 implies that the behavior is as if there
was an explicit declaration and so this section does not apply.

So, I think that this one remains unresolved. However, I'm leaning
towards a literal interpretation, which requires that this be an
error.

---
Bill                            { uunet | decwrl | telesci }!twwells!bill
bill@twwells.com