Pink Floyd writes:
> Well, there was one limit on bitfields that I was not aware of that has
> helped me decide about changing to bitfields. They can not cross
> integer boundaries! That is, I can only have 32 fields in any bitfield
> structure. I thought it was unlimited, which would have been the
> overwhelming reason to switch to them. I guess I'll stick with bitvectors.
Whoa. Bitfields not being able to cross integer boundaries means that
you can't have a single bitfield that contains more bits than an int. I
don't think that there is any intrinsic limit to the number of bitfields
you can have in a structure.
My C book sucks, I think. So lemme get this straight. Any particular field
can not cross an integer boundary, like this:
struct bitfield_struct {
unsigned a : 25;
unsigned b : 10; /* this one's forbidden, it contains an integer boundary */
};
but this is not a problem:
struct bitfield_struct {
unsigned a: 30;
unsigned b: 1;
unsigned c: 1;
unsigned d: 1;
...
};
and that, in fact, I could have a bitfield structure with 100 entries, as
long as no particular entry crosses the integer boundary?
Assuming this is the case, can I safely assume that I can write a bitfield
structure to my player file and then read it in later?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/07/00 PST