Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!uunet!microsoft!bobatk
From: bobatk@microsoft.UUCP (Bob ATKINSON)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Packing, Ordering, and Rearranging
Message-ID: <57650@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 23 Sep 90 21:41:30 GMT
References: <1407@lupine.NCD.COM> <2218@ux.acs.umn.edu> <57467@microsoft.UUCP> <1990Sep21.130531.7437@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>
Reply-To: bobatk@microsoft.UUCP (Bob ATKINSON)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 21

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
>jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:

>>One cannot write portable software, and in general take control of the
>>intimate details of structural layout.

>Successful languages (so far) give complete control where it is demanded
>by the programmer.  

Jim, I believe, agrees with you that such demands do arise and must be 
provided for.  He merely points out that such control is NON-PORTABLE and 
never has been in C++ OR C. From this viewpoint, he argues that therefore
such explicit control should be the exception rather than the rule; in
the absence of any explict programmer demands, the compiler should be 
free to have more control about structure/class layout than is currently
the case.

>Kent, the man from xanth.

	Bob Atkinson
	Microsoft