Re: [boost] alignment problem in proposed any alternative

From: Maxim Yegorushkin (maxim.yegorushkin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-11 03:40:26

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:30:00 +0400, christopher diggins  
<cdiggins_at_[hidden]> wrote:

[]

> The question I have is whether in practice though are there are any
> compilers which have stricter alignment requirements on small types (<=
> sizeof(void*)) than a void pointer. In other words, is it possible with  
> any known compiler to actually throw the runtime error ?

You can probably force do the same thing as malloc() from glibc does and  
use a default alignment of 8 for 32bit and 16 for 64bit platforms:

   Alignment:                              2 * sizeof(size_t) (default)
        (i.e., 8 byte alignment with 4byte size_t). This suffices for
        nearly all current machines and C compilers. However, you can
        define MALLOC_ALIGNMENT to be wider than this if necessary.

-- 
Maxim Yegorushkin