Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: A glitch regarding the usual malloc() idiom Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 19:14:13 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <4cd22745-22ad-4ac7-bdba-39ffa1c75e13@googlegroups.com> <7d995799-5f23-4784-a62e-ea423de00650@googlegroups.com> <36f1e05e-609e-4e0e-8819-86feee1f4d8c@googlegroups.com> <57933a73.4812875@news.xs4all.nl> <5793c8e5.2941812@news.xs4all.nl> <87oa5n97rz.fsf@bsb.me.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="12061"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX196+VyrrF4zsKpEU6OPC4Cp" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:eGXvVpUrwI0i9HfZi7SQL6nxXjY= sha1:0OWyQKs3y6kEG7sJrK4mpo56KoU= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:90946 jameskuyper@verizon.net writes: [...] > There are CHAR_BIT padding bits in a padding byte. [...] As I just mentioned in response to Richard Heathfield, the standard (almost) consistently uses the the term "padding bits" to refer to bits within the representation of an integer that do not contribute to its value, and "padding bytes" to refer to bytes within the representation of a structure or union that are not part of the representation of any member. A collection of CHAR_BIT padding bits is just CHAR_BIT padding bits. The collection, though it happens to be the same size as a byte, might not even be addressible, which means it would not meet the standard's definition of a "byte". -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this." -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"