Re: The --with-wide-int build and Lisp_Sub_Char_Table assertion

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 21:32:32 +0300
> From: Dmitry Antipov <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
> 
> On 01/12/2015 08:26 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > This is exactly the flaw: the assumption that if the size of 'struct
> > vectorlike_header' is 4, the offset of the next struct member is also
> > 4.  In reality, a compiler can add padding, and evidently here it did,
> > probably to get that member aligned an a 8-byte boundary.
> 
> For MinGW/32, 1) what happens if you use -m[no-]ms-bitfields?

With or without the "no" part?  -mms-bitfields is the default.
Anyway, I don't think this matters, since we don't have here
zero-width bitfields.

> Or 2) what about using __attribute__((packed))?  Stefan doesn't like
> it for an obvious reasons, but may be just for this particular
> case...

What for?  I already solved the problem in the most natural way, see
the modification of the 'verify' statement I posted.  Are you saying
it is incorrect?  If so, what is the problem with my suggestion?