On 08/29/18 18:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> As against that, of course, explicitly zeroing fields that you know very
> well are already zero eats some cycles. I've occasionally wondered if
I haven't checked what a smart C99 compiler actually emits for a
designated initializer giving a field a compile-time known constant zero.
Is it sure to eat any more cycles than the same initializer with the field
unmentioned?
-Chap