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: -malign-double


 >Sorry to be a pest, but nobody answered this the last time I asked:
 >
 >I've just noticed that the 3.1 documentation for the -malign-double
 >flag no longer contain the warning about structures; i.e., it used to
 >read:
 >
 >
 >-malign-double'
 >`-mno-align-double'
 > Control whether GCC aligns `double', `long double', and `long
 > long' variables on a two word boundary or a one word boundary.
 > Aligning `double' variables on a two word boundary will produce
 > code that runs somewhat faster on a `Pentium' at the expense of
 > more memory.
 >
 > *Warning:* if you use the `-malign-double' switch, structures
 > containing the above types will be aligned differently than the
 > published application binary interface specifications for the 386.
 >
 >I'd been burned badly by not paying attention to this in the past.
 >
 >What is the current situation?
 >
 >David

It disappeared during the checkin of this patch

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/Attic/invoke.texi.diff?r1=1.252&r2=1.253

But the corresponding patch posted to gcc-patches

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-12/msg00719.html

doesn't mention this.

Was this intentional?



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