On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 02:04 -0800, Kenton Varda wrote:
I leave your first question for Nicolas to answer. I don't understand
the backend well enough to dig into this part. sorry for the late reply,
I have been out of the country for a few days and busy with work...
> Unfortunately, there is anothe
Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
>If I use "unsigned char*", then I get no warning. However, I fail to see why
>using an additional variable makes a difference...
>
>This does not work (&b[0] is a pointer to an unsigned char, right?):
> unsigned char b[4];
> htole32a(&b[0], value);
>
>while this do
only one TCP
> > connection for the whole batch, rather than one per page.
> >
> That is due to the fact that the backend closes the bjnp connection
> (like if does for the USB-connection).
> >
> > Any ideas?
> Please provide some detailed traces so we can see wh
Am Donnerstag, 20. Januar 2011, um 21:26:42 schrieb m. allan noah:
> What if you make the pointer unsigned char instead?
If I use "unsigned char*", then I get no warning. However, I fail to see why
using an additional variable makes a difference...
This does not work (&b[0] is a pointer to an un
A good portion of the problem may be GCC's optimization routines. As
the -O level rises, the compiler makes assumptions about things like
pointers which are more strict than the standard requires.
Unfortunately, these routines can become confused unless your code is
laid out very explicitly.
I thi
