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