From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: structures size
Date: Sat, 06 May 2000 11:29:46 +0100
Organization: Customer of Planet Online
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <3913F41A.D8DD3A7D@bigfoot.com>
References: <Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10005041827250 DOT 48816-100000 AT ieva05 DOT lanet DOT lv> <3911D576 DOT 947D53CF AT mtu-net DOT ru> <3913074E DOT 9405129F AT bigfoot DOT com> <39133B43 DOT 5BC03E9 AT mtu-net DOT ru>
NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-88.protactinium.dialup.pol.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news5.svr.pol.co.uk 957612264 10069 62.136.65.88 (6 May 2000 11:24:24 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 May 2000 11:24:24 GMT
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT theplanet DOT net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

"Alexei A. Frounze" wrote:
> 
> Richard Dawe wrote:
> > Is it better because you can nest packing pragmas this way?
> 
> Yup. This was the idea I have in mind. Seems to be a bit better. Right?

I prefer "__attribute__((packed))" myself on the actual structure, but
nestable packing pragmas seem like a good idea if you're using them in
header files. Is this push/pop a gcc extension?

Bye,

-- 
Richard Dawe
richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/