mumbel

@emteere I was leaning towards endianess just because, in my test case at least I couldn't repro with x86_64 or riscv64 (I'm not setup to compile for 32-LE, or just...

any news on this regression?

Awesome, thanks for talking a look/fixing

The scenario I'm seeing is (this is sort of from memory, dont have that image in front of me) ``` THUNK_FUNC: #(aabb0000) lis r11, %hi(FUNC) ori r11, r11, %lo(FUNC) bctr...

Thanks for taking a look @ghidra1 ... yeah this def seems like a hard problem to accurately describe and I'm not certain I could share my target binary. I did...

Also being able to release exclusive and keep checked out would be nice if this is looked into

I would say for my use case: I do not expect a duplicate name, but I also do not want to guarantee that struct will contain the field, so the...

Could it be an array return type or were you hoping avoid that?

still seeing in 10.3 ``` struct foo *x; struct bar *y; x = get_foo(); if (!x) { return NULL; } y = find_bar(); if (!y) { y = get_bar(); if...

Yeah, you're right, it's not the same as the original. I'll create a new issue if I come across again and it's more of a type mismatch than known null/const