From: Keith Thompson <kst@cts.com>
Subject: Re: A Record Interpretation of an Array
Date: 31 May 2001 18:22:51 -0700
Date: 2001-05-31T18:22:51-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yecr8x5f0yc.fsf@king.cts.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3B16306C.48347CB4@earthlink.net
"Marc A. Criley" <mcqada@earthlink.net> writes:
[...]
> Since all the array elements/record fields in this pathology are of the
> same type (therefore size), there should be no reason for a modern
> compiler to reorder them.
Probably true, but there's no guarantee that it won't. (I'm probably
more fanatical than most about sticking to what the standard actually
guarantees whenever possible.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-01 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-28 22:53 A Record Interpretation of an Array Marc A. Criley
2001-05-29 3:29 ` Jeffrey Carter
2001-05-29 13:34 ` Ted Dennison
2001-05-29 14:16 ` Marin David Condic
2001-05-31 0:55 ` Keith Thompson
2001-05-31 12:47 ` Marc A. Criley
2001-06-01 1:22 ` Keith Thompson [this message]
2001-06-01 0:14 ` Mark
2001-06-01 8:45 ` Ehud Lamm
2001-06-01 12:39 ` Marc A. Criley
2001-06-01 18:20 ` Tucker Taft
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox