On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 12:49 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Also, I didn't think that much about it until now, but I'm not sure > why you need this change in the first place. It is an array of > pointers to constant characters. Given we allocate said array > before setting this variable to it and don't modify it via this > pointer, I believe we are fine with out this. > > Compiler certainly isn't complaining about patch 2 without this > one. Am I missing something? Hmm, I definitely had a need for it, but I can't reproduce any compiler errors without it now, as you say. I think I changed approach somewhere along the way, and this patch is no longer necessary. Thanks Daniel
