christianbiere@gmx.de wrote:

> IOW, that's exactly the reason why memcpy() is used there in
> first place. If it was as simple as using a cast you could
> just write
> 
> 	left = ntohl(*lp);
> 	right = ntohl(*(lp + 1));

The point is that gcc could optimize memcpy() to use normal
load/store insns if the addresses are guranteed aligned.
If you don't think it's valid, please consult gcc guys.
---
Izumi Tsutsui