>>>>> "Segher" == Segher Boessenkool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Segher> Good point. Suggestions for better wording? How does Segher> "any access to a naturally aligned scalar object in memory Segher> that is not a bit-field and fits in a general purpose integer Segher> machine register, will be performed by a single machine Segher> instruction whenever possible" Segher> or Segher> "any access to a naturally aligned scalar object in memory Segher> that is not a bit-field and not bigger than a long int, will Segher> be performed by a single machine instruction whenever Segher> possible" Segher> sound? As I said before, I think any words of this form SHOULD NOT be added. All it does is add words to the documentation that provide NO guarantee of anything -- but in a way that will confuse those who don't read it carefully enough into thinking that they DID get some sort of guarantee. In other words, a statement like that has clear negative value. paul