Re: RFC: 32 bits as smallest atomic size.

[David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk>]

Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2005, at 00:27, David Hopwood wrote:
>> Keir Fraser wrote:
>>> On 26 Mar 2005, at 17:31, Jimi Xenidis wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Few things to note:
>>>>>> 1) packed is [un]necessary since the ABI will do the right thing
>>>
>>> I prefer to pack things explicitly rather than rely on ABI padding.
>>
>> If you use -Wpadded when compiling with gcc then you're not relying on
>> ABI padding; you're automatically checking that it is not used. That
>> would seem to be precisely what is required here.
> 
> If I could specify it on a per-struct basis then it would be perfect.

There is no way to selectively enable/disable warnings in gcc:
<http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9049>  :-(

OTOH, spurious warnings for padding in private structures cause no real
harm. If only a few private structures are involved, you could add dummy
padding to those anyway.

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk>



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click