Am Donnerstag, den 08.05.2014, 21:11 +0200 schrieb Paweł Dziepak:
> 2014-05-08 20:45 GMT+02:00 Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@inria.fr>:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Am Donnerstag, den 08.05.2014, 13:41 -0400 schrieb Rich Felker:
> >> BTW in your above example, it's not even clear to me if that use of
> >> alignas is valid.
> >
> > Besides the question of such a thing makes sense or noţ with the
> > current version of the standard it isn't syntactically valid. alignas
> > can't be applied to struct fields. So for the moment the whole
> > discussion in the standard about types with extended alignment is
> > pointless.
> >
> > This issue has been raised as a defect report, and it seems that the
> > committee agrees to change this in a corrigendum.
> >
> > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_444.htm
> 
> My bad,

no, no, the "bad" is clearly in the standard, this is by no means easy
to read nor to understand

all that max_align_t discussion shows that the alignment stuff in the
standard is underspecified and is missing semantics.

Jens


-- 
:: INRIA Nancy Grand Est :: http://www.loria.fr/~gustedt/   ::
:: AlGorille ::::::::::::::: office Nancy : +33 383593090   ::
:: ICube :::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536   ::
:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183   ::
:: :::::::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 ::