Editorial issue: terms "empty initialization" and "default initialization" in C23 working draft

[frederick-vs-ja]

The formal definition of term default initialization is introduced by N3042. But its meaning is largely different from that of default-initialization in C++ (AFAIK it's essentially consistent with value-initialization or zero-initialization in C++). On the other hand, the term empty initialization is introduced by N2900 but unused.

I think it would be confusing if one find that "default initialization" in C is generally not "default-initialization" in C++. Can we just use "empty initialization" (or alternatively, "zero initialization") for description of such initialization?

Perhaps this repo is not a good place for submitting editorial issue, but I failed to find how to submit editorial issue for C.

[ThePhD]

Editorial issues for C can be sent by e-mailing the project editors on this page:

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/contacts.html

(I am one of them.)

It is my intention, for C23, to rewrite how the initialization rules are spelled out and introduce better terminology. It might take some time, though; I have to be careful I change no behavior.

[ThePhD]

This is done.