On Tuesday, October 19, 2010 18:14:25 Tomek CEDRO wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> I want to keep the cast because I am not familiar enough with the code > >> to judge what happens if I omit the cast > > > > the point is of type "void *". C does not need an explicit cast to go > > from "void *" to anything else. C++ might barf on you without an > > explicit cast, but this isnt C++. > > > > if you were doing an offset, then the cast might be ncessary to get the > > right type before doing the math. but that isnt the case either. > > Yes, data needs to be casted onto "void *".
the data itself is already "void *", so no cast is necessary if assigning it to any other pointer. > Some time ago in one project I changed a bit the structure of a code I did > not know well and it had bad consequences, so generally I try to use > existing parse if possible with minor changes this is why i like to avoid unnecessary casts. invalid pointer conversions may be suppressed because people are too liberally sprinkling casts. > I can see that changes are commited as #1863 - thank you Mike :-) so you'll submit an updated patch ? -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download new Adobe(R) Flash(R) Builder(TM) 4 The new Adobe(R) Flex(R) 4 and Flash(R) Builder(TM) 4 (formerly Flex(R) Builder(TM)) enable the development of rich applications that run across multiple browsers and platforms. Download your free trials today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ UrJTAG-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development
