From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:41:16 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: MINGW vs DJGPP
Message-ID: <3ADDEDDC.30481.14D88F5@localhost>
References: <3ADDD586 DOT 15573 DOT EE76FB AT localhost>
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010418180351.29608G@is>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 18 Apr 2001, at 18:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
> 
> > > > Compiler           switch          reported size of struct vp
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.2   -fpack-struct   80 eighty
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.3   -fpack-struct   79 seventynine
> > > > mingw gcc 2.95.2   -fpack-struct   79 seventynine
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.2                   80 eighty
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.3                   80 eighty
> > > > mingw gcc 2.95.2                   88 eightyeight
> > > > 
> > > > when manually added, the sum of the sizes of the struct members is _79_
> > > 
> > > So it looks like -fpack-struct does work, at least in 2.95.3.
> > 
> > With my test case I'm getting following results:
> > 
> > DJGPP port of gcc-2.95.3 : doen't work
> 
> This is _really_ strange: how come the same binary yields different 
> results?  Does the bug depend on the struct layout perhaps?
> 
> I also don't understand why are there differences between MinGW, DJGPP, 
> and GNU/Linux for the same GCC version: these all target the same 
> processor, so the alignment of struct fields should be the same, no?

Well it seems to work with C but not with C++ (I tested C++ first). The 
same under Linux.

For MINGW and with gcc-3.0 prerelease -fpack-struct works both for 
C and C++

Andris