This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: sizeof bit-fields

From: Eljay Love-Jensen <eljay at adobe dot com>
To: Christian Schäfer <caefer at krachstoff dot net>, gcc help <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:26:27 -0500
Subject: Re: sizeof bit-fields
References: <5.2.1.1.0.20031017082617.017eceb8@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com><5.2.1.1.0.20031016071317.018963c8@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com><5.2.1.1.0.20031016071317.018963c8@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com><5.2.1.1.0.20031017082617.017eceb8@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com>

Hi Christian,

>well, at least you have function pointers, right?

Function pointers are a great deal different from object methods.

Especially since if you put function pointers in the structure, it will make the structure more than 5 bytes big (which is one of the criteria).

And I don't think C allows static function pointers that are part of (or associated with) a struct.

Note -- a person can do object-oriented programming with C.  Case in point, the POV ray-tracer.  But the language (at least, C89) doesn't facilitate object-oriented programming.

But, as I've said, I haven't programmed in C since 1989, and C99 may have incorporated some new-and-interesting programming techniques/paradigms.

Sincerely,
--Eljay

References:
- Re[2]: sizeof bit-fields
  - From: Eljay Love-Jensen
- Re: sizeof bit-fields
  - From: Eljay Love-Jensen
- Re[3]: sizeof bit-fields
  - From: Christian Schäfer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]