Re: PATCH: Remove unnecessary zero-initializations

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 11:09:18PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >Currently, thirteen files which provide a target_ops explicitly initialize
> >members they don't support to NULL.  I plan to delete a number of these
> >methods, and rather than making sure I got all the necessary target files
> >each time I just wanted to delete the unnecessary lines up-front.  All of
> >these are called-once functions initializing a statically or globally
> >declared object; C will guarantee zero-initialization for us.  And several
> >of the functions explicitly called memset anyway.
> >
> >Besides, this way grepping for .to_require_attach\ = will only find targets
> >which define it to something useful.
> >
> >I'll commit this tomorrow unless someone sees a problem with it.
> >
> >Note1: remote-st.c hasn't been compilable in a while; m68*-tandem-* is
> >probably a good candidate for the hitlist.  From a glance it looks like it
> >has been broken since the HP merge added the NULL assignments I'm removing,
> >which is about three years now I think.
> >
> >Note2: The DONT_USE member of struct target_ops can go now.
> 
> The fact that 13 files were doing it should suggest that it was 
> intentional.  Might want to wait a bit longer while someone dregs up the 
> history.

Well, to me the fact that those thirteen files were doing it implies
it's a leftover.  Look at them; the two win* one are cut-pasted from
inftarg.c; the others (except for sol-thread.c) are cut-pasted from
remote.c.  And neither of those has the zeros.

But it doesn't cost me anything to wait, except for slowing down the
progress on the fork patches :)  I'll give it a few days.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer