Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #464Re: Randomly ordered fields !?!? (Was: "packed" objects)
From: Reid Ellis
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 1990 17:22
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 1990 17:22
19 lines
1192 bytes
1192 bytes
In <1313@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>I'm not keen on the idea that the use of the word "struct" (as opposed to
>"class") should be taken as the indicator of the programmer's desires in
If you actually do this, how about using "volatile"? e.g.:
volatile class foo {
int a;
char b;
someType c;
};
It even looks like what you mean. Not that I think this is a good
idea either, however. :-) Just suggesting a "nicer" syntax.
Reid
--
Reid Ellis 264 Broadway Avenue, Toronto ON, M4P 1V9 Canada
rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu || rae%alias@csri.toronto.edu || +1 416 487 1383
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<rae.651950550@fred>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!geac!alias!fred!raeReferences:
<56638@microsoft.UUCP> <1229@lupine.NCD.COM> <56744@microsoft.UUCP> <1313@lupine.NCD.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!geac!alias!fred!rae From: rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Reid Ellis) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Randomly ordered fields !?!? (Was: "packed" objects) Message-ID: <rae.651950550@fred> Date: 29 Aug 90 17:22:30 GMT References: <56638@microsoft.UUCP> <1229@lupine.NCD.COM> <56744@microsoft.UUCP> <1313@lupine.NCD.COM> Sender: Reid Ellis <rae%alias@csri.toronto.edu> Reply-To: Reid Ellis <rae@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> Organization: Alias Research, Inc. Toronto ON Canada Lines: 19