[cfe-dev] Fix for PR4701

[steve naroff]

Sounds good.

Thanks for working on this,

snaroff

On Aug 17, 2009, at 8:58 AM, David Chisnall wrote:

> On 15 Aug 2009, at 00:51, steve naroff wrote:
>
>> Given the number of fields, it sounds like we should go with your
>> least disruptive solution to this. You've convinced me that my
>> original suggestion is unlikely to scale to 23 fields...
>>
>> Oh well. Given the amount of time I spent on this "cleanup", I hate  
>> to
>> add cruft (but we need to support the legacy idioms I suppose...).
>
> Is it okay if I commit this patch?  Then we can start ironing out  
> any issues that arise.
>
> David