Re: [ob] Remove initializations of memset'd structure

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:33:27PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii writes:
>  > > From: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
>  > > Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:30:06 -0500
>  > >  > >  
>  > >  > > -    MSYMBOL_TYPE (m) = mst_unknown;
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > This part of the patch seems to assume that mst_unknown has the value
>  > >  > zero.  Should we have such assumptions in the code?
>  > > 
>  > > Yes, in symtab.h mst_unknown is 0.
>  > 
>  > I know that, I looked it up in symtab.h.  The question is, should the
>  > code rely on the fact that zeroing out the struct causes the
>  > MSYMBOL_TYPE member to become mst_unknown.  Suppose we change the
>  > enumeration some day, that would break the code.
>  > 
> 
> Oh, I see. I misunderstood you. 
> 
>  > So I think a comment is not enough, we should leave that line alone.
>  > In general, it is my opinion that code should not assume anything
>  > about the numerical values of enumerated types.
> 
> That's true. It would be safer to leave the line alone. I'll change
> it back. Also language_unknown is used similarly.
> 
> I've committed this.

Thanks.  The only downside is that this suggests the type of the
terminating symbol can ever be read without being in error, which is
incorrect; the minimal symbol table's end appears to be marked by
otherwise by SYMBOL_LINKAGE_NAME (msym) == NULL.  Other minimal symbols
may have type mst_unknown.

Obviously this can't hurt though.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer