Related articles |
---|
Layout of Structs jac@paul.rutgers.edu (1989-05-28) |
Re: Layout of Structs henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1989-05-31) |
Re: Layout of Structs jac@paul.rutgers.edu (1989-06-02) |
Re: Layout of Structs aglew@mcdurb.Urbana.Gould.COM (1989-06-04) |
From: | jac@paul.rutgers.edu (J. A. Chandross) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Keywords: | symbol tables, offsets, psects, real-time monitor |
Date: | 28 May 89 02:06:27 GMT |
References: | <3979@ima.ima.isc.com> |
Distribution: | na |
Organization: | Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. |
stein@pixelpump.osc.edu (Rick 'Transputer' Stein)
> I have some questions about how a compiler constructs a symbol table.
> [questions on structure layout deleted]
Our erstwhile moderator replies:
> C compilers have the right to lay out structures any way they see fit,
> unless the ANSI committee changed the rules.
I quote, without permission, from The Bible, page 196, First Edition:
"Within a structure, the objects declared have addresses which increase
as their declarations are read lef-to-right. Each non-field member of
a structure begins on an addressing boundry appropriate to its type;
therefore, there may be unnamed holes in a structure. Field members
are packed into machine integers; they do not straddle words. A field
which does not fit into the space remaining in a word is put into the
next word....."
It is a Good Thing [tm] that structures are laid out in this way. As
a hardware type, I often need to write device drivers. Being able to
impose a structure onto a hardware memory map is a very useful thing,
indeed.
Jonathan A. Chandross
Internet: jac@paul.rutgers.edu
UUCP: rutgers!paul.rutgers.edu!jac
[I hope I'm not the erstwhile moderator yet, but stand corrected. -John]
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.