widl: Initialize variables that are not necessarily filled in encode_type

[André Hentschel]

Am 22.02.2017 um 10:35 schrieb Huw Davies:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:06:46PM +0100, André Hentschel wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: André Hentschel <nerv at dawncrow.de>
>> ---
>>
>> This helps with reproducable builds
>>
>>  tools/widl/write_msft.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/widl/write_msft.c b/tools/widl/write_msft.c
>> index 137bb2d..39be30b 100644
>> --- a/tools/widl/write_msft.c
>> +++ b/tools/widl/write_msft.c
>> @@ -2195,7 +2195,7 @@ static void add_union_typeinfo(msft_typelib_t *typelib, type_t *tunion)
>>  static void add_typedef_typeinfo(msft_typelib_t *typelib, type_t *tdef)
>>  {
>>      msft_typeinfo_t *msft_typeinfo = NULL;
>> -    int alignment, datatype1, datatype2, size, duplicate = 0;
>> +    int alignment = 0, datatype1 = 0, datatype2 = 0, size = 0, duplicate = 0;
> 
> encode_type() initializes alignment, datatype1 and size in all cases, so these
> are unnecessary.  The question then becomes where is the best place to
> initialize datatype2 (a.k.a. decoded_size).  Since no caller to encode_type()
> relies on the existing value being preserved, it makes sense to initialize
> it in encode_type().  So just send the patch you originally sent to wine-devel.
> 
> Huw.
> 

as far as I can see those variables are also not set in every case, e.g. VT_VARIANT
further the encode_type() can recurse, and I would expect the variables to stay the same (in case they need to be incremented), so setting decoded_size to 0 at the beginning seems wrong
on the other hand, no incrementation is done, so I think for now I can resend my old patch... I just wonder what to do with the other variables