19 Dec
2008
19 Dec
'08
13:31
>>> On 12/19/2008 at 2:22 PM, Philipp Thomaswrote: > * Dominique Leuenberger (Dominique.Leuenberger@TMF-Group.com) [20081219 > 11:59]: > >> *pSample++ = bswapLE16(*pSample); >> Looks already suspicious... >> > >> Would splitting it into >> *pSample = bswapLE16(*pSample); >> *pSample++; >> Actually have the effect as intended originally? Or is it impossible to > really tell this? > > This is exactly what the original intended. Earlier gccs didn't flag this > but the the order is undefined so a compiler is also allowed to do > > *pSample++; > bswapLE16(*pS2ample); > > which would be wrong. > > Philipp Philip, Thank you very much for this explanation. I created the patch according this information. I was especially troubled with the incrementor being in front of the equal sign... but by pure logic and understanding of it, it has to be executed after the assignment.. so I assume it's correct ;). Thank you very much... I have some other ones ;) (but will be a new thread). Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-programming+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-programming+help@opensuse.org