Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site alberta.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!alberta!jeff
From: jeff@alberta.UUCP (Curt J. Sampson)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Un-alignment in structures
Message-ID: <435@alberta.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Mar-85 03:07:11 EST
Article-I.D.: alberta.435
Posted: Thu Mar 28 03:07:11 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Mar-85 00:27:14 EST
References: <9434@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: jeff@alberta.UUCP (Curt J. Sampson)
Organization: his Personal Computer
Lines: 19

In article <9434@brl-tgr.ARPA> sde@Mitre-Bedford writes:
>How about adding keyword(s) 'aligned/unaligned' to deal with the pointer
>alignment question?  Of course, it would help to be able to specify a
>general (un)alignment default.

Ugh!  The last thing we need is a couple more keywords.  How about adding
it as a compiler option.  The '-f' option would tell the compiler to
optimize code for fast running (ie, do alignment of structures so you can
access their elements fast), otherwise make the code small (don't pad
structures to save space).  Adding two new keywords seems rather
unnecessary.
--
	Curt Sampson		ihnp4!alberta!jeff

"There is a theory which states that if every anyone discovers exactly what
 the Usenet is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
 replaced by somehing even more bizarre and inexplicable.

"There is another theory which states that this has already happened."