Re: [lwip-devel] SMEMCPY()

[Kieran Mansley]

On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 11:04 -0400, Bill Auerbach wrote:
> If people take "light weight" to mean small code footprint then memcpy will
> take up less code than however many SMEMCPY's there are creating an inline
> for loop and copy.  Some compilers that see a memcpy with a small constant
> may also optimize this to an inlined byte copy and maybe more efficient by
> unrolling the byte copies.

SMEMCPY will still be over-ridable by the porter if they think that on
their platform some other implementation makes more sense.  

Kieran