[email protected] wrote in <[email protected]>: |On 09.01.2026 14:25, Herman ten Brugge wrote: |> On 1/9/26 12:57, grischka wrote: |>> On 09.01.2026 08:04, Herman ten Brugge via Tinycc-devel wrote: |>>> While debugging some i386 code I found some memory alignment difference\ |>>> s. |>>> |>>> 1) The double and long long type differ inside and outside struct. |>>> |>>> outside struct (size = 8, align = 8): |>>> double a; |>>> long long b; |>>> |>>> inside struct (size = 8 align = 4) |>>> struct { |>>> double a; |>>> long long b; |>>>}; |>>> |>>> This only happens on x86 (and perhaps on !TCC_ARM_EABI which I \ |>>> cannot test). |>> |>> I cannot reproduce this. Alignment is 4 in both cases |> I tried again with gcc4/gcc15/gcc16/clang21/clang22 with program below. | |Sorry, but 'gcc' or 'clang' were not mentioned at all above. Just |"memory alignment differences" and "inside and outside struct". | |Since we're on the tinycc list the natural thing to assume was |that the somewhat strange difference does exist in TCC, rather |than that the difference exists in gcc or that it exists between |tcc and gcc or clang. | |> I still think we should fix the i386 alignment. | |So... |- by "the i386 alignment" you mean alignment of 'double' and 'long \ |long' on i386, |- and by "we should fix" you mean us to assume a bug in TCC, |- and by "I still think" you mean to substitute the still missing arguments | for that assumption. | |Is that correct? ;)
I am thankful To Herman for all the work he does, just to mention this. Also to you, of course. But i got the gut feeling you are now pissing around. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
