kenkahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> >> char *buffer[1024];
> >> *((uint32_t)buffer) = 0x1234;
> >
> >I don't believe that has ever been valid.
>
> *SIGH* I meant to write
>
> char buffer[1024];
> *((uint32_t)buffer) = 0x1234;
>
> Is that better (and allowed)?
That doesn't make sense. A uint32_t is not a pointer (at least, not
normally; you didn't actually show the typedef). You can't indirect
through a non-pointer.
This is legal C:
*((uint32_t *)buffer) = 0x1234;
and it is allowed.
Ian
