Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.std.c |
| Subject | Re: Structure Packing. |
| Date | 2012-06-12 15:06 -0400 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <4FD79328.A040F7B8@bytecraft.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <jqovin$9sr$1@dont-email.me> <4FD6ABFA.72F52C75@bytecraft.com> <jr7fpp$eti$1@dont-email.me> <4FD7659E.89172310@bytecraft.com> <a3p9irFkgbU1@mid.dfncis.de> |
Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote: > On 12.06.2012 17:51, Walter Banks wrote: > > > I have resolved every issue in this specific processor except memcpy > > and memcmp both of which are rarely used in embedded systems. > > I rather doubt the correctness of that assessment. And even if it were > correct, "rarely used" would not help you --- you would need "never > used". For tricks like the one you're considering to be viable, you > would have to intercept not just every call of memcpy(), but worse, > every single one of the roll-your-own implementations of it hidden > somewhere in the code --- including those that aren't even written in C > to begin with. Danger, Will Robinson! That isn't going to happen the memcpy and memcmp related issues would be a show stopper. > > I am uncomfortable even with packing the struct elements out of > > order. > > You should be more than uncomfortable --- that's actually disallowed by > the standard. To quote C99 6.7.2.1#16: > > Within a structure object, the non-bit-field members and the units in which bit-fields > > reside have addresses that increase in the order in which they are declared. I represented Canada at ISO working on C99 and am aware of the wording and know the reasons. It is the reason I am so uncomfortable. We have never done it and this is a case where a struct empty space sometime exceeds the amount of ram space used. Arrays of structs are a disaster in some cases. Something that I just thought of that might work is to add an create an information message as part of the listing summary that identifies teh struct and a better data order declaration. The hardware in this case is imposing the constraints. The current implementation allocates next fit for each structure element. As the day goes on I am getting convinced that it is a bad idea. Walter Banks
Back to comp.std.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Structure Packing. John Kearney <dethrophes@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-06 17:27 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-06 21:19 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-11 22:39 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-12 09:21 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-12 11:51 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2012-06-12 18:37 +0200
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-12 15:06 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-12 16:22 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-12 17:44 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2012-06-13 15:53 +0200
Re: Structure Packing. Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-06-18 12:37 +0300
Re: Structure Packing. Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-12 16:22 +0000
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-12 15:24 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-06-12 16:33 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-06-12 17:17 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-06-06 18:35 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. John Kearney <dethrophes@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-06 21:58 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-06-06 23:54 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. John Kearney <dethrophes@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-07 07:47 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-06-07 12:39 -0400
Re: Structure Packing. jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-06-07 11:14 +0200
Re: Structure Packing. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-06-07 09:46 -0700
Re: Structure Packing. John Kearney <dethrophes@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-07 11:57 -0700
csiph-web