http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15151
--- Comment #5 from Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-03-21 04:32:17 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > The comment about the math being the same is because > ((void*)<addr> + integer) should result the same pointer as > ((unsigned char*)<addr> + integer). But the point of my comment is that ((void*)<addr> + integer) is only valid with GCC (and probably other compilers trying to be compatible with it), not according to any C standard. I haven't checked if this affects the patch, just wanted to point it out because I used to be unaware of it as well. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ xorg-driver-ati mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-driver-ati
