C: Assigning structures

suppose we have the following type:

typedef struct {
    int bar;
    int baz;
    int foo;
} Something;

In order to do a copy, I usually do something like:

Something a, b;
...
memcpy ((void *) &a, (const void *) &b, sizeof(Something));
But also the following is legal (and far more quick to write).

Something a, b;
...
a = b;
Is there any disadvantage in doing the second one?

>>35,40
I can't come up with some scheme to make GCC handle memcpy and = differently
I want it to use the builtin memcpy, otherwise it's pointless.
Are you listening to yourself? Have you not read a single thing anyone else is saying? They're the same goddamn thing. The built-in memcpy() is not even a real function call. They can't behave differently because by definition they do the same thing.

You're not making any sense.