On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 05:33:51PM -0500, Jeff Horwitz wrote: > On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, chromatic wrote: > > >Okay, so memcpy doesn't fix it. That's good to know. How about explicitly > >putting the destination PMC in a named variable so there's less pointer > >shuffling and macro madness? > > memmove fixes it. i submitted a patch, but for some reason it hasn't made > it to RT or the list...
Do the structures actually overlap, or is this necessary band aid for a subtly broken compiler? Nicholas Clark
