From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-72266-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 24162 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2003 20:32:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 24150 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2003 20:32:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.jlokier.co.uk) (81.29.64.88)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Apr 2003 20:32:21 -0000
Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.jlokier.co.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3LKWLjF017147;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:32:21 +0100
Received: (from jamie@localhost)
	by mail.jlokier.co.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h3LKWLf4017145;
	Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:32:21 +0100
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:58:00 -0000
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DECL_USER_ALIGNMENT
Message-ID: <20030421203220.GA17139@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
References: <10304212014.AA01453@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <10304212014.AA01453@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg01009.txt.bz2

Richard Kenner wrote:
>     The essential quirk is this: whenever you take the address of an
>     object, if you have specified the object's alignment and it is less
>     than that of the original type, 
> 
> That should be an error.

Are you saying that it should be an error to take the address of such
an object?

-- Jamie