Right, I was not certain that there would never be overlap. I figured that any performance difference was negligible for this part of the compiler, so why not use memmove?
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Steve Ellcey <s...@cup.hp.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:26 -0700, Mike Murphy wrote: >> I'm curious why you use memmove rather than memcpy? > > It looks like memcpy should be safe to use. In most cases we are > copying to or from a local variable and the pointer that is the other > argument for memcpy can't be pointing at that variable. The only one > that isn't like that is Copy_option. I don't think those arguments > should overlap but I am not positive about it. > > Steve Ellcey > s...@cup.hp.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Open64-devel mailing list Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
