On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 23:52, Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I meant was that
>
> > (char *) block + Bump_BLOCKHDRSZ
> vs
> > ((char *) block) + Bump_BLOCKHDRSZ
>
> , when combined with my little experience with pointer addition and
> precedence, and a lack of compiler at the ready at that point in time,
> I was afraid that "(char *) block + Bump_BLOCKHDRSZ" would be parsed
> as "(char *) (block + Bump_BLOCKHDRSZ)", which would get different
> offsets across the two statements.
> Godbolt has since helped me understand that both are equivalent.
I failed to notice this. I've made them the same regardless to
prevent future questions from being raised about the discrepancy
between the two.
David