"una_020" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "David Hamill" <david@> wrote: > > > > Use sizeof. That's what it's there for! > > > > Bearing in mind that structs often incorporate padding, it's > > not easy to find their size. I suppose you could initialise > > an area of memory to 0x00, write a struct over it, and see > > which bytes contain bits that have changed; then do the same > > but initialising to 0xff; then deduce the size of the struct > > from the results. But it's much easier and more reliable to > > use sizeof. > > > > David > > > cud u plz elaborate on padding concept?
Could you please do some googling or research before asking the first question that comes into your head?!! Forums are excellent for specific questions, but they are atrocious in terms of structured learning. -- Peter
