Le 30/08/2010 12:31, Stefano Babic a écrit :
> Detlev Zundel wrote:
>> Hi Reinhard,
>>
> Hi Reinhard, hi Detlev,
>
>>> should make the buffer an union:
>>>
>>> union {
>>> uint32_t ui[MAX.../4+1];
>>> uint16_t us[MAX.../2+1];
>>> uint8_t uc[MAX...+1];
>>> } linebuf;
>>
>> That also sounds good indeed - it even better documents the intention of
>> the code so by my own arguments I'd vote for it. I presume you will
>> follow up with such a patch once you tested it?
>
> I agree this is a better solution as adding a simple comment. Some time
> a comment is valid only at the time of the writing, and further patches
> could drop its meaning if the comment is not updated, too.
Do we have to pick one? I say the code should use union *and* a one-line
comment should mention how the union enforces the alignment requirement.
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
