From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun  4 01:38:22 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A7A2737B401; Wed,  4 Jun 2003 01:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chiark.greenend.org.uk (chiark.greenend.org.uk
	[193.201.200.170])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D2DDA43F75; Wed,  4 Jun 2003 01:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from fanf@chiark.greenend.org.uk)
Received: by chiark.greenend.org.uk (Debian Exim 3.35 #1) with local
	id 19NTmn-0007fy-00; Wed, 04 Jun 2003 09:38:21 +0100
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 09:38:21 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20030604083821.GM18938@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
References: <20030603215322.31853.qmail@web13403.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030603210338.A70533@espresso.bsdmike.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030603210338.A70533@espresso.bsdmike.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
cc: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <giffunip@yahoo.com>
cc: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: GNU extensions on FreeBSD 5.x headers
X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Standards compliance <freebsd-standards.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-standards>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-standards@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>,
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 08:38:23 -0000

On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 09:03:38PM -0400, Mike Barcroft wrote:
> 
> I think those of us who've played with alternative compilers are aware
> of this requirement.  I'm not sure there's anything we can do about
> it.  If anyone has any tricks to force 128-bit alignment without a
> 128-bit type in standard C, I'd love to hear it.

Not in standard C (since it doesn't allow you to express alignment and
padding requirements), but in C-as-she-is-spoke why not insert the
necessary padding explicitly?

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
FORTIES CROMARTY: SOUTHEASTERLY VEERING SOUTHWESTERLY 4 OR 5. RAIN OR THUNDERY
SHOWERS. MODERATE WITH FOG PATCHES, BECOMING GOOD LATER.