On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 21:20:12 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 20:50:30 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Sunday, 27 October 2013 at 20:30:05 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Yah, something like that. I found align(NNN) underspecified
and underpowered for my work with allocators. As a simple
matter, NNN must be a literal, not a compile-time expression.
You can't even write e.g. align(size_t.alignof), which is
fairly basic.
Andrei
"alignment relative to the start of the struct"
what does that even mean? Alignment means (address % alignment)
== 0
what would be the use case for guaranteeing ((fieldAddress -
StructAddress) % alignment) == 0 that can't be just as easily
done using normal alignment
Observation shows that that's *how* align currently behaves
anyways:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]#post-nhrvixioystchhdpmakg:40forum.dlang.org
Its like its incorrectly named, and actually specifies "paking".
However, the two concepts seem packed into one, resulting in some
confusing semantics and bahaviors.
