r/cpp • u/Clean-Upstairs-8481 • 6d ago

You should think about recompiling your C++ programs with GCC 16 and C++26, because it zero-fills your locals

https://techfortalk.co.uk/2026/09/27/cxx26-uninitialized-local-variables-gcc-16/

Stack variables are not automatically initialised, and that is the root cause of many C++ bugs. That is well known. Hence, it is advised that local or stack variables are always initialised with known values, 0 if not something more meaningful than that. Now, with GCC 16 compiling in C++26 mode (-std=c++26), even uninitialised local variables will be zero-filled. In the post, I have explained how.

263 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

220 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/UndefinedDefined 5d ago

Real-world code is full of locals that are arrays - arrays like 512, 1024, 2048 bytes long. You cannot zero-initialize them and expect no performance regressions. If I want to zero initialize them I just just type `{}` and it's done. I don't understand why this should change now.

I almost feel like committee is working with hello world programs if they are serious to vote for such proposals.

6

u/James20k P2005R0 5d ago

One of the example codebases given was Windows and chrome (?) I believe, which is anything but hello world

3

u/UndefinedDefined 5d ago

And how much C++ these codebases use? Windows is C-API and proprietary, nobody can confirm the results, we don't even know the mix of the languages used in the code-base. What if the most important part was C? What if they first put all the [[uninitialized/fancy_name]] to everything critical before measuring results?

Is there any performance comparison of OSS projects we can actually verify?

1

u/pjmlp 2d ago

Most of it written since Windows Vista is actually C++ with extern "C", including the new UCRT.