re PR c/39525 ([easy to fix bug] Docs for C99 "designated initializers" isn't clear...

	PR c/39525
	* doc/extend.texi (Designated Inits): Describe what happens to omitted
	field members.

From-SVN: r208835

diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index ee0df1c23e9bb9e09140651f18b256fb9c8daf69..ff4a21bcf83e30db84e92e48541c1bd63249f3a7 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2014-03-26  Marek Polacek  <polacek@redhat.com>
+
+       PR c/39525
+       * doc/extend.texi (Designated Inits): Describe what happens to omitted
+       field members.
+
 2014-03-26  Marek Polacek  <polacek@redhat.com>
 
        PR other/59545

diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index c0da713e8213e5fce420489da1202b7a55ef8d0a..90bf6d841a0f13ce94893a839e34dfc7e7bceb43 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -1967,6 +1967,9 @@ Another syntax that has the same meaning, obsolete since GCC 2.5, is
 struct point p = @{ y: yvalue, x: xvalue @};
 @end smallexample
 
+Omitted field members are implicitly initialized the same as objects
+that have static storage duration.
+
 @cindex designators
 The @samp{[@var{index}]} or @samp{.@var{fieldname}} is known as a
 @dfn{designator}.  You can also use a designator (or the obsolete colon