This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: structure members of packed structures

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:59:05 -0700
Subject: Re: structure members of packed structures
References: <1058218768.3313.62.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> <1DF6B000-B645-11D7-890F-000393D76DAA@apple.com>

On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 02:50:00PM -0700, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> Contingent on STRICT_ALIGNMENT, please.  Unaligned accesses are not
> a problem on all architectures.

I strongly do not think we should make the legality of the & operator
contingent on STRICT_ALIGNMENT.  All the world's an x86, and everyone
else will suffer if you do this.

Personally, I have no problem with the address being taken and giving
SIGBUS when used (or, gasp, fixed up by UAC fault software).

This, IMO, is one of those "well don't do that then" sorts of problems.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: structure members of packed structures
  - From: Dale Johannesen

References:
- Re: structure members of packed structures
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: structure members of packed structures
  - From: Dale Johannesen

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