X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 18:28:17 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Upgrading from a bad C compiler In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1 AT inter DOT net DOT il To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Message-id: <83a9xy7qwe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <17d4b525-2c31-4c20-b3c5-a7118343e9a5 AT googlegroups DOT com> <3331145d-900b-4bef-8ad0-f533f0b4a17b AT googlegroups DOT com> <83lii3hd5r DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <83ipd5fbjd DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > From: "Rod Pemberton" > Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 03:17:55 -0400 > > > > You do realize that C could've added padding even to simple types. Yes? > > > > Isn't that what my example with long double demonstrates? > > > > No. Unfortunately, you used circular logic. You took an implementation, > which may or may not be correct in it's implementation, assumed that it is > correct, and concluded that your premise leading to the conclusion must also > be true. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning You declare everything that is contrary to your expectations as broken implementation. Several people told you that you are wrong, but you are still not convinced, and still think that everybody else is wrong. That will get you nowhere. If you really think GCC is broken, please take it up with GCC developers. This is no longer a DJGPP issue.