This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
> >test_struct.test_short = 0x1234; > >printf("%04x\n", test_struct.test_short); > > > >_may_ work. I don't think it's guaranteed to work, though. > > Actually, I'm pretty sure it is guaranteed to work as long as the > compiler can see the "packed" attribute during compilation I believe you're right. It's only when you use the "&" operator to hide the actual structure from the compiler that things go wrong. > If you aren't sure we're right, take out the "packed" attribute and try > again. It should work fine then. Also, stop the debugger after the > assignment to test_pointer and examine its value: it should be 16-bit > aligned. IIRC, on an ARM7, it will store one byte in the "wrong" place and leave the other byte alone. -- Grant Edwards grante@visi.com ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |