Re: Type size vs. actual size difference.

["Vladimir Olensky" <vladimir_olensky@yahoo.com>]

Bruce Detter wrote in message <8b5hhp$pvv1@svlss.lmms.lmco.com>...
>Using GNAT 3.12 on Win NT 4.0.  We have defined a record that has a length
>of 214 bytes.  The type'Size attribute reports 214, but when we declare a
>variable of the record type (X : Type) the size attribute X'Size reports
>216.  It appears the actual variable size takes into account adjustments to
>word boundaries (and of course the type'Size attribute can't do this).  Is
>there a preprocessor command or pragma command that will force byte
boundary
>alignment so that the type size agrees with the actual size?


This topic was discussed recently here.
Topic name was:  Size (novice question).

Shortly - size of the stand-alone variable is a multiple of storage units.
(Variable should be stored and accessed in memory in effective manner ).

In your case 216 = Byte'Size*7;
But Type'Size is exactly 214.

If your record would be a part of the other record  it's
size could be made exactly 214 bits.

Regards,
Vladimir_Olensky