Mail #9859

Back to main page of archive

Previous mail   Next mail   Unformatted/full headers
Overview  10 days   Subject   Date   Thread   Author  

From: CBFalconer
Subject: packed records' address again
Date: 4 Feb 2004, 21:17:46

Francesco Bonomi wrote:
> 
> I have been following the "cannot take address of packed record"
> thread and now I have a similar problem.
> 
> I perfectly understand that doing a strcopy is an implicit
> conversion, but I think that the program gets carried away
> during checks :-)
> 
> I had a VERY complex data structure and it took me quite a while
> to reduce it to the minimum, please bear with me if it's anyway
> a bit intricate.
... snip ...

AFAICS you have no components smaller than a byte in the first
place.  If you are operating on a byte addressing machine, why
bother with the PACKED descriptor?  You should simply arrange your
records so that the larger items, such as integers, precede the
smaller ones, such as chars.

Previous mail   Next mail   Unformatted/full headers
Overview  10 days   Subject   Date   Thread   Author  

Replies

In reply to

Back to main page of archive

Note: This page contains information that does not originate from the owner of this web site, but from the authors of the mails archived. The owner of this web site is not responsible for the content of such information. Any use of that infomation requires the consent of the respective author.

Where WWW addresses (URLs) in the mails archived are marked as hyperlinks, this is only for the comfort of the reader. The content of the web pages linked to like this does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the owner of this web site or of the authors of the mails archived. The owner of this web site is not responsible for the content of such web pages. Those pages are explicitly not to be considered as part of the content of this page, but merely as references.

This page was created by Crystal 0.999 (Linux 2.4.27/i686).