[PATCHv2 wayland 0/8] wayland-scanner: produce code with c99 initializers

[Emil Velikov]

On 18 June 2018 at 11:36, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 16:49:37 +0100
> Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here's a take v2 of the series, with the following changes:
>>  - don't trim trailing NULL entries from the wl_interfaces* array
>>  - updated tests - separate patches to ease review, to be squashed
>>
>> On the question of why, despite the aesthetics these patches make the
>> generated files actually understandable by a human being...
>
> Hi Emil,
>
> on the previous round, this concern was raised:
>
Thanks, did not spot that one.


> On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:36:06 +0000
> Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> wrote:
>
>> But that being said, my worry is that we don't actually control the
>> compilation environment for the scanner output. Scanner output
>> currently compiles with '-pedantic -ansi -Wall -Wextra' (at least,
>> when inline is defined). This patch changes that requirement, and I
>> worry that - like previous discussions on changing scanner output -
>> that upgrading Wayland would lead to people hitting compilation
>> failures.
>
> What is your rationale for that being a non-issue?
>
According to [1] GCC has supported designated initializers since v3.0,
released some 17 years ago [2].
Clang has supported them from a very early age. On the Windows front
MSVC 2013 introduced support and it EOL.

Other less common compilers (say the Sun/Oracle or Intel ones) are
fine as well - although I cannot give you exact details.

In other words unless someone does one of the following two they're
perfectly fine.
 - uses unsupported (ancient?) compiler, or
 - explicitly sets -pedantic -ansi _and_ -Werror

In the case they do, they should seriously reconsider what they're
inflicting on themselves.
Both from functionality and security POV.

-Emil

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html
[2] https://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html