Hi,
Greg Stein wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 04:08:25PM +0200, Pavel Novy wrote:
>
>>...
>>I agree this is an undesirable way for bitfields to be aligned, but this
>>agrees with MSVC, upon which we based the bitfield layout. (In MSVC the
>>smallest we can make the struct is 4 bytes!)
>>
>>I think the way to work around this is to change the bitfield base type to
>>"unsigned char". The type of the bitfield is used in determining how it is
>>aligned; thus, using a smaller type will require a smaller alignment.
>>...
>>--- util_uri.h.orig Mon Feb 26 16:49:32 2001
>>+++ util_uri.h Mon Aug 27 15:44:41 2001
>>@@ -106,10 +106,10 @@
>>
>> unsigned short port; /* The port number, numeric, valid only if port_str !=
>NULL */
>>
>>- unsigned is_initialized:1;
>>+ unsigned char is_initialized:1;
>>
>>- unsigned dns_looked_up:1;
>>- unsigned dns_resolved:1;
>>+ unsigned char dns_looked_up:1;
>>+ unsigned char dns_resolved:1;
>>
>> } uri_components;
>>
>
>
>Screw the bitfields. Just change all of them to plain old unsigned chars.
>(and apr_byte_t in APR). There is no reason to be miserly with bits here.
>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
I agree, but the proposed change was designed to not affect
sizeof(uri_components) on other platforms then NetWare. It's not a good
idea to invoke unwanted compatibility issues on those platforms. After
change, the bitfield still occupies one byte (on Linux aligned to 2
bytes, on NetWare to 1 byte).
Regards,
Pavel
