🚀 go-pugleaf

> ==========Michael Cook, 11/30/95==========
 
> >>>>> "JG" == John Galt <jgalt@infosoft.com> writes:
 
>  JG> 12.  Allow bit-field structures to be of any size, and allow the
>  JG> declaration to specify the position of the fields.
 
> That sounds reasonable.  The most frequent use of bitfields
> seems to be to
> model external data (such as hardware registers or datacom packets).
> It's frustrating to be restricted to partial specifications.

With all of the discussion of the freedom to compilers
on sizeof the raw block, where the stuff is in the block,
and where the "this" points in all of that (assuming it
is in and not out of the block), I have not yet convinced
myself that it is possible to code stuff that is "up close
and personal" to hardware without intimate knowledge
of a particular incarnation of a particular compiler (I have
not yet had much time for this either).  This was not as much
of a potential problem in C.  So, is there a way to nail
this sort of thing to the floor without such intimate knowledge?
Or do I still have to compile some C code with strict C
rigidity of rules (or even assembly code) to insure the
proper alignment?  [Hopefully, I solve my hardware
problems at home, get Win95 installed, and my compilers
(both Borland 4.5x and VC++ 4.0) up so I can try things
out on reasonably current compilers.  sigh]

Good Day
Dick
Dick.Menninger@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM



---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]