Re: nstrftime.c fails to build due to memset overflow

[Paul Eggert]

On 3/14/23 09:50, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> The attached also addresses -Wmaybe-initialized warnings in coreutils
> that show up at lower optimization levels.

Let's not make that sort of change, please. It makes the code harder to 
read and analyze, because I look at the code and wonder, "why is this 
variable being initialized when it doesn't need to be?" And it doesn't 
insulate the code against the smarter compilers of the future, which I 
presume will warn us against unnecessary assignments.

If you're going to make that sort of change, at least do what GNU Emacs 
does:

  /* 'int x UNINIT;' is equivalent to 'int x;', except it cajoles GCC
   into not warning incorrectly about use of an uninitialized variable. */
  #if defined GCC_LINT || defined lint
  # define UNINIT = {0,}
  #else
  # define UNINIT /* empty */
  #endif

and then say "int x UNINIT;" instead of "int x;". But personally I would 
leave things alone and ask people to use better compiler options that 
don't generate so many false positives.