From: David H. <dav...@bl...> - 2005-03-27 15:40:21
|
Keir Fraser wrote: > On 27 Mar 2005, at 00:27, David Hopwood wrote: >> Keir Fraser wrote: >>> On 26 Mar 2005, at 17:31, Jimi Xenidis wrote: >>> >>>>>> Few things to note: >>>>>> 1) packed is [un]necessary since the ABI will do the right thing >>> >>> I prefer to pack things explicitly rather than rely on ABI padding. >> >> If you use -Wpadded when compiling with gcc then you're not relying on >> ABI padding; you're automatically checking that it is not used. That >> would seem to be precisely what is required here. > > If I could specify it on a per-struct basis then it would be perfect. There is no way to selectively enable/disable warnings in gcc: <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9049> :-( OTOH, spurious warnings for padding in private structures cause no real harm. If only a few private structures are involved, you could add dummy padding to those anyway. -- David Hopwood <dav...@bl...> |