> [...] said, moving to fat function pointers on machines that don't
> already use them is a real ABI change and therefore a big deal; but
> it could be done if there were a compelling argument to justify going
> through all the associated dark rituals.
Or as a private experiment, in which
Am Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:13:32PM +0100 schrieb Thomas Klausner:
> riastradh pointed out that this probably needs to be applied to
>
> src/sys/net/zlib.c
>
> as well, but that code seems to be from an older zlib version and the
> patch doesn't apply cleanly.
>
> Can it be changed to use
riastradh pointed out that this probably needs to be applied to
src/sys/net/zlib.c
as well, but that code seems to be from an older zlib version and the
patch doesn't apply cleanly.
Can it be changed to use common/dist/zlib instead?
If not, someone(TM) please merge the change.
Thomas
-
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 09:16:36PM -0400, Mouse wrote:
> Indeed, you can have different sizes for pointers to different object
> types, too. I _think_ pointers to different function types can have
> different sizes, but I'm less certain of that. (There would be little
> point, since all
