My compiler (C++Builder6) syntactically allows array member initialization (at least with zero), but actually it doesn't really do it. So the assert in the example given below fails depending from the context.
#include <assert.h>
struct TT {
char b[8];
TT(): b() {}
};
void testIt() {
TT t;
assert(t.b[7] == 0);
}
Changing the compiler isn't an option at the moment. My question is: what will be the best way to "repair" this flaw with respect to future portability and standard conformance?
Edit: As it turns out, my first example was too short. It missed the point, that the fill level of the array is so essential, that it has to be stored very close to the array, which is: in the same class.
Even if the original problem remains, my actual problem pattern is usually this:
struct TT2 {
int size;
char data[8];
// ... some more elements
TT2(): size(0), data() {}
// ... some more methods
};
I think you may use this:
TT() { std::fill(b, b + 8, char()); }
This way you will solve your problem while nothing is wrong with portability and standard conformance!
You may use fill_n like suggested in: C/C++ initialization of a normal array with one default value
If no fill_n is available, you can always use memset like:
TT() {memset(b, 0, sizeof b);}
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With