I have similar structures and have never seen the warning for that cases. Which clang version do you use?
-- Sent from cellphone, sorry for the typos On March 3, 2016 22:22:26 Andrzej Telszewski <[email protected]> wrote: > On 03/03/16 21:55, Bubke Marco wrote: >> You don't have to silence the warning, it is a warning not a error. And you >> can change that in the settings. >> >> I think it quite informative that >> >> bool x, y, z; >> int w; >> char c; >> >> Is not optimal. If you don't like that disable it in the settings. > > I do think that having this kind of information is useful, but in my > opinion -Wno-padded should be default, and turning on the warning should > be left to those who need it. I personally added -Wno-padded to the > clang model settings. > > Say you have a struct like that: > struct nopad > { > bool flag1; > bool flag2; > }; > > It is perfectly fine structure and you don't have to pad it, yet you get > the warning. I would understand, if the warning told you to re-arrange > the members, but it simply warns you about what is the default compiler > behavior, that it will add 2 or 6 bytes of padding. This has been the > default compiler behavior for ages, so I don't see the point of giving > the warning by default;) In addition, the padding depends on the > architecture you're compiling for, so you would have to take it into > account. > > I'm not against the warning, I'm just saying it shouldn't be enabled by > default. > > My real structure is like that: > typedef struct > { > string name; > bool can_span; > } info_key_t; > > There is nothing sensible I can change to make the warning disappear. > >> >> -- >> Sent from cellphone, sorry for the typos >> >> >> On March 3, 2016 20:44:28 Andrzej Telszewski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 03/03/16 20:23, Bubke Marco wrote: >>>> Hi, we will add more options in 4.0 to the code model, so you can choose >>>> different sets. >>>> >>>> Anyway I find the padding warning quite useful because it shows that your >>>> data structures are sub optimal. >>>> >>> >>> Nope, it does not tell you it's suboptimal. It tells you that compiler >>> will add the additional padding/alignment bytes. >>> >>> Having structure with say 3 bool's and nothing more is perfectly fine. >>> In such a case, to silence the warning, I would have to add some dummy >>> fields, which most of the time is not necessary. >>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from cellphone, sorry for the typos >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On March 3, 2016 19:30:31 Andrzej Telszewski <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Qt Creator: 3.6.0 >>>>> >>>>> Could _-Wno-padded_ flag be added to the Clang Code Model flags? >>>>> I don't believe that warning about padding should be the default behavior. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Andrzej Telszewski >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Qt-creator mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Andrzej Telszewski >> >> -- >> Sent from cellphone, sorry for the typos >> _______________________________________________ >> Qt-creator mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator >> > > > -- > Pozdrawiam, > Best regards, > Andrzej Telszewski _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
