Un-alignment in structures
sde at Mitre-Bedford
sde at Mitre-Bedford
Tue Apr 2 02:36:11 AEST 1985
|>How about adding keyword(s) 'aligned/unaligned' to deal with the pointer
|>alignment question? Of course, it would help to be able to specify a
|>general (un)alignment default.
|
|Ugh! The last thing we need is a couple more keywords. How about adding
|it as a compiler option. The '-f' option would tell the compiler to
|optimize code for fast running (ie, do alignment of structures so you can
|access their elements fast), otherwise make the code small (don't pad
|structures to save space). Adding two new keywords seems rather
|unnecessary.
|--
| Curt Sampson ihnp4!alberta!jeff
And how would the compiler option know which structures &/or sub-structures
are to be aligned and which are to be packed? (But if the comment was only on
the question of "...default", then "... TWO new keyowrds " is not correct.
Also, it would be nice to be able to treat such a default as similar to
conditional compilation, so that for debugging purposes, a section's default
could be changed to determine if a problem lay therein. This certainly could
not be done by compiler options ( even though, to grant you a point, you could
do somthing like 'cc -.. <structname>," or whatever, assuming arbitrarily
long command length).
David Eisenberg sde at mitre-bedford
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list