Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!teddy!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!lll-crg!brooks
From: brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: The one and only objection to C
Message-ID: <350@lll-crg.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 31-Dec-84 20:10:26 EST
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.350
Posted: Mon Dec 31 20:10:26 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 13-Jan-85 08:01:01 EST
References: <69@galbp.UUCP>
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG group
Lines: 16

> I love C. I think it's by far the best compiler based language that has ever
> been produced.
> 
> I only have minor complaint:
> why in the world does most C compilers insist on padding structures?
> 
> I am currently working on a network driver that needs to handle a data
> packet that has a precise structure to it. It's easy to describe the
> structure in C, but if the compiler puts in padding between fields, I can't
> simply read in a packet on top of a structure. I must instead "jump" over
> the padding bytes both going and comming.
> 
> "No, you stupid computer, do what I mean, not what I type!"
> ...akgua!galbp!bing

alignment, alignment, alignment