On 07/25/2012 12:40 PM, William J. Schmidt wrote: > Thanks for the quick review! Excellent point about the array size. The > attached revised patch follows your suggestion to limit the size. > > I only did this for the new field, as changing all the existing > accessors to inline functions is more effort than I have time for right > now. This is left as an exercise for the reader. ;)
Sure. ;-) > Bootstrapped and tested on powepc64-unknown-linux-gnu with no new > failures. Is this ok? Ok. r~
