>I think they were referring to the default member initializer Ah, that would make more sense. The combination of bitfield and default initializer syntax does

>I think they were referring to the default member initializer Ah, that would make more sense. The combination of bitfield and default initializer syntax does look especially odd, since both features are rarely used IME. >I couldn't see any reference to anything similar in what you linked Indeed, there is no way to specify default values for a C struct at definition time.