From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6846 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2003 22:04:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6838 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2003 22:04:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO monkey.daikokuya.co.uk) (213.152.55.49) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Sep 2003 22:04:48 -0000 Received: from neil by monkey.daikokuya.co.uk with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1A1vH0-0007er-00; Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:04:42 +0100 Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:17:00 -0000 From: Neil Booth To: Gabriel Dos Reis Cc: "Michael N. Moran" , Andreas Schwab , gcc Subject: Re: Arrays and Alignment Message-ID: <20030923220441.GE18772@daikokuya.co.uk> References: <3F709E2D.3030400@bellsouth.net> <3F70A191.7010805@bellsouth.net> <20030923214036.GC18772@daikokuya.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg01048.txt.bz2 Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:- > | > Thanks for the instantaneous reply :-) > | > > | > I must confess, however, that I don't understand what you mean > | > by "both". Do you mean (1) array alignment and (2) array element > | > | He means, I think, that &a[n] == &a[0] + n * sizeof (a[0]) is an > | inescapable fact of life. > > Certainly, but alignment and sizeof are not unrelated attributes. That may be true, but I stand by my statement, which I believe you agree with, and I interpret that as what Andreas meant. Neil.