This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DECL_USER_ALIGNMENT
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: jamie at shareable dot org
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 03 16:37:58 EDT
- Subject: Re: DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DECL_USER_ALIGNMENT
Are you saying that it should be an error to take the address of such
an object?
What I was thinking was more that it should be an error to create an object
whose alignment is less than that of its type, but you correctly point out
that an alternate solution is to allow that but, like a bitfield, to forbid
taking its address.