Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!geac!alias!fred!rae
From: rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Reid Ellis)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Randomly ordered fields !?!? (Was: "packed" objects)
Message-ID: <rae.651950550@fred>
Date: 29 Aug 90 17:22:30 GMT
References: <56638@microsoft.UUCP> <1229@lupine.NCD.COM> <56744@microsoft.UUCP> <1313@lupine.NCD.COM>
Sender: Reid Ellis <rae%alias@csri.toronto.edu>
Reply-To: Reid Ellis <rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu>
Organization: Alias Research, Inc. Toronto ON Canada
Lines: 19

In <1313@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>I'm not keen on the idea that the use of the word "struct" (as opposed to
>"class") should be taken as the indicator of the programmer's desires in

If you actually do this, how about using "volatile"?  e.g.:

		volatile class foo {
			int a;
			char b;
			someType c;
		};

It even looks like what you mean.  Not that I think this is a good
idea either, however. :-)  Just suggesting a "nicer" syntax.

					Reid
--
Reid Ellis  264 Broadway Avenue, Toronto ON, M4P 1V9               Canada
rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu || rae%alias@csri.toronto.edu || +1 416 487 1383