This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 14:13, Toralf Lund wrote: > OK. I also found out why I thought it sometimes worked; in fact I didn't > take the address of a basic type in those cases, but of the struct > itself instead. In other words, in my above example > > struct somestruct *ptr=&value; > > ptr->b=-100; > > > would probably do the right thing. I'm I right in assuming that this > will always be allowed? Yes, that should work. You can have pointers to structs that contain unaligned members and references to those members will work as expected. You just can't isolate the unaligned member from its containing structure. R. ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |