OS_CRC

[Jonathan Coxhead]

On 23 Sep 2002, at 13:00, Tony van der Hoff wrote:

> On 14 Sep 2002, in message <4917f0754b.Jan-Jaap at c2i.net>,
> you wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I was surprised to find that the start of the block in
> > OS_CRC/XOS_CRC is defined as a byte const *, while the end of the
> > block is defined by a char const *. I'm not saying it is wrong
> > (I'm somewhat of a C newbie), but I find it unexpected... Why is
> > this?
> > 
> 
> Well, I agree that it looks odd; I would have expected them to both be byte
> const *. The reasons (if any) are shrouded in the mists of time.

   Probably just an early mistake by me, I think. I dithered over whether some 
of these should be "void *" or "byte *" (or even "char *") and must have missed 
a case during the final shakedown.

> On the other
> hand, although it may force a nasty cast, I'm not sure that it is worth changing
> at this stage. Are there any strong feelings out there in OSLib-land?

   I think that if it was changed, the worst that would happen would be a 
compiler warning (not an error), and if that's true it's probably worth fixing. 
It's only cosmetic though, as the code generated is the same in either case.

        /|
 o o o (_|/
        /|
       (_/