Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 v7 ucbtopaz-1.8; site ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!mwm
From: mwm@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: The importance of alignment on a VAX
Message-ID: <835@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 20-Mar-85 21:19:47 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbtopaz.835
Posted: Wed Mar 20 21:19:47 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Mar-85 23:54:54 EST
References: <466@lll-crg.ARPA> <9339@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: mwm@ucbtopaz.UUCP (Praiser of Bob)
Distribution: net
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 17
Summary: 

In article <9339@brl-tgr.ARPA> ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes:
>> For those who think that aligment is not important on a VAX I suggest your
>You're twisting what I was saying.  What I was complaining about was that
>there was no feature for defeating it even on machines like the VAX where
>the hardware will support it easily.  It would be nice to read structures
>from other machines (like PDP-11's) sometime.

Ron is right, C needs a "packed" struct type. I.e. -

static packed struct gezornin {
	<objects which will not have alignment> ;
	} ;

There: by careful choice of wording, I've managed to insure that such a
feature will *never* appear in C :-).

	<mike