More bit field problems
11-Jun-90 23:22:28
Sb: #108178-More bit field problems
Fm: Jerry Masker 76657,1775
To: Mike Spille/Manx 71545,1466
Mike,
I agree that the standard allows a certain (lot) of lattitude for the
compiler writer. HOWEVER … I (and probably most others) would expect bit
fields to be packed tightly in the environment's natural word size. The
variations I would expect would be left/right or right/left packing
(although I have a DEFINITE preference for left/right on the 68k series,
but probably right/left on the PeeCee). I could also see why a compiler
writer might want to pad out words. BUT … I don't see any logical sense
to starting each bit field on a byte boundary, or padding each out to an
integral number of bytes, which I seem to remember reading here the other
day. I haven't had the chance to see what Manx does yet … I rarely use
the things … but being the controversial type due to some of my previous
messages, I just thought I'd stir things up a little <grin>.
🙂
Jerry.