From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-21 22:35:15
In-Reply-To: <d1na66$6p2$1_at_[hidden]>
daniel_at_[hidden] (Daniel James) wrote (abridged):
> > 5. change implementation of hash values for pointers so undefined
> > behavior is gone (and consider adding x + (x >> 3) )
>
> I'm going to do that.
Is it worth considering using x + x / sizeof(*p) instead?
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK