Bug 171273 – [GTK] -Wmissing-field-initializers triggered by RemoteInspectorServer.cpp:128

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: WebKitGTK

[Michael Catanzaro]

[1240/5820] Building CXX object Source...emote/glib/RemoteInspectorServer.cpp.o
../../Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/glib/RemoteInspectorServer.cpp:128:1: warning: missing initializer for member ‘_GDBusInterfaceVTable::padding’ [-Wmissing-field-initializers]
 };

[Michael Catanzaro]

Created attachment 308099 [details]
Patch

[Michael Catanzaro]

This will obviously break if those padding values are ever used, but I think that's OK. It's not really possible to do better since it's a constant.

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #2)
> This will obviously break if those padding values are ever used, but I think
> that's OK. It's not really possible to do better since it's a constant.

Do we want to break the build with future glib versions only to fix a harmless warning? There are two more uses of _GDBusInterfaceVTable, btw.

[Michael Catanzaro]

(In reply to Carlos Garcia Campos from comment #3)
> (In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #2)
> > This will obviously break if those padding values are ever used, but I think
> > that's OK. It's not really possible to do better since it's a constant.
> 
> Do we want to break the build with future glib versions only to fix a
> harmless warning? There are two more uses of _GDBusInterfaceVTable, btw.

This is the only case that's emitting a warning for me, so it's the only one I touched. Are other uses allocated differently?

Yes, we definitely want to break future versions of GLib. It's very easy for us to modify the structure initialization in the future if new members are added, which is not even particularly likely. Keeping the build free from warnings is very important; we can't see important warnings if we don't fix smaller ones like this.

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #4)
> (In reply to Carlos Garcia Campos from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #2)
> > > This will obviously break if those padding values are ever used, but I think
> > > that's OK. It's not really possible to do better since it's a constant.
> > 
> > Do we want to break the build with future glib versions only to fix a
> > harmless warning? There are two more uses of _GDBusInterfaceVTable, btw.
> 
> This is the only case that's emitting a warning for me, so it's the only one
> I touched. Are other uses allocated differently?

Nope, we use the same pattern in RemoteInspector, RemoteInspectorServer and RemoteinspectorClient

[Michael Catanzaro]

Created attachment 309497 [details]
Patch

[WebKit Commit Bot]

Comment on attachment 309497 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 309497

Committed r216582: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/216582>

[WebKit Commit Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.