Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!nuchat!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: FileInfoBlock Message-ID: <7219@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 7 Dec 90 12:17:24 GMT References: <15413@cbmvax.commodore.com> <26622.27392887@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <1990Nov27.152357.4893@unx.sas.com> <7155@sugar.hackercorp.com> <27257.275ce563@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Distribution: comp Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 42 In article <27257.275ce563@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> markv@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: > You will get an error. You must use a static storage class for an > __aligned structure for somewhat obvious reasons. Just like you cant > have a __chip object on the stack. I don't see why you can't have an __aligned structure on the stack... it'd just take an extra instruction on subroutine entry. But that doesn't address the question I asked: that is if you have a structure with an __aligned element is that whole structure forced __aligned: typedef struct { struct FileInfoBlock __aligned fib; blah blah blah; } baz; Now what if you do this: foo() { baz zot; ... } Is this illegal? > > > -- > > Peter da Silva. `-_-' > > . > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Mark Gooderum /\ \ | / H a p p y > Academic Computing Services / v\ -- * -- H o l i d a y s ! :-) > University of Kansas /v v\ / | \ /// > /__v___\ Only /// /| __ _ > Bitnet: MARKV@UKANVAX || \\\ /// /__| |\/| | | _ /_\ makes it > Internet: markv@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu \/\/ / | | | | |__| / \ possible > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .