Re: nano-malloc assumes sizeof(int) >= sizeof(void*)

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen at redhat dot com>]

On Dec 15 22:42, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> I don't know if there's a better (i.e. more portable) way of
> aligning-up a pointer, but at least this moves the problem to
> platforms where pointers are bigger than "long" instead of "int".
> Found on msp430 large model, with the heap above the 64k boundary -
> malloc() was truncating addresses to 16 bits.  Ok?

Yep.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat

Attachment: pgpkXGHnzZgkh.pgp
Description: PGP signature