This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: attribute "unpadded"
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at cambridge dot redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 20:18:47 -0000
- Subject: Re: RFC: attribute "unpadded"
Types with this new attribute will have unusual semantics - you can't
have arrays of them nor take the addresses of objects with that type,
You can take their addresses; you just can't do pointer arithmetic.
So, you're adding more
complexity to an edifice that is already rather baroque -- and the end
result of the combination of these attributes will be difficult to
explain and understand.
Yes; I make this argument all the time when we discuss various extensions.
When the extension just provides an easier way of doing something
that can already be done, it's a particularly strong argument. In this
case, that's not true; the proposed extension does let us do something