Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com> wrote: > This makes me a little nervous. I don't know what the compiler > guarantees are about something allocated on the stack in a sub-block > within a function, but the above use just looks wrong. As soon as > the variable goes out of scope, the compiler may choose to put > something else on the stack in its place, which in this case would > lead to memory problems.
Oops, I was too hasty. You're quite right. Thanks for spotting that. Will fix. > Perhaps the solution is to move the variable declaration back to > the top of the file. > I haven't checked the context to see if this is a problem in the > other hunk in this change. Will check. - Julian
