From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-10 19:57:56
Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
> "Tobias Schwinger" wrote:
>
>>Maybe I don't understand
>>the problem correctly.
> char* p;
> p = (char*)&p + 1;
OK, now I get it. And I don't think it's that bad anymore.
> I argue somewhere that this is enough
> for absolutely all practical situations and that
> other, more complicated types of offset pointer
> can be removed from shmem.
Right. Who would seriously want to point to the second byte of an address?
Thanks,
Tobias