Order of structure members in memory

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

Are the members of a struct guaranteed to have ascending memory
addresses?

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[Jack Klein]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 19:15:05 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Benson-Manica
<at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> wrote in comp.lang.c:

Are the members of a struct guaranteed to have ascending memory
addresses?

Yes, always in C.

--
Jack Klein
Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
FAQs for
comp.lang.c http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~a...FAQ-acllc.html

[Ben Pfaff]

Christopher Benson-Manica <at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> writes:

Are the members of a struct guaranteed to have ascending memory
addresses?

Yes.
--
"A lesson for us all: Even in trivia there are traps."
--Eric Sosman

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

Jack Klein <ja*******@spamcop.net> spoke thus:

Yes, always in C.

Just for my edification, what is the chapter and verse? Thanks...

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[Eric Amick]

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:07:47 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Benson-Manica
<at***@nospam.cyberspace.org> wrote:

Jack Klein <ja*******@spamcop.net> spoke thus:

Yes, always in C.

Just for my edification, what is the chapter and verse? Thanks...

In C99, it's 6.7.2.1, paragraph 13.

--
Eric Amick
Columbia, MD

[Derrick Coetzee]

Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:

Jack Klein <ja*******@spamcop.net> spoke thus:

Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:
Are the members of a struct guaranteed to have ascending memory

addresses?
Yes, always in C.

Just for my edification, what is the chapter and verse? Thanks...

In C90, it's 6.5.2.1, verse 11:

"Within a structure object, the non-bit-field members and the units in
which bit-fields reside have addresses that increase in the order in
which they are declared."

This is a bit vague, since you don't technically declare the units
bit-fields reside in (but rather the bit-fields that go in them, but
adjacent bits fields do go into each unit). Bit-field members within a
unit are in implementation-defined order.
--
Derrick Coetzee
I grant this newsgroup posting into the public domain. I disclaim all
express or implied warranty and all liability. I am not a professional.