Commit b7d2eeed authored by Philip Withnall's avatar Philip Withnall

gmacros: Don’t use __alignof__ in G_ALIGNOF implementation

It has different semantics from _Alignof and our G_STRUCT_OFFSET
fallback. See the comments in the diff for details.
Signed-off-by: Philip Withnall's avatarPhilip Withnall <>

parent ea0da960
......@@ -1870,11 +1870,16 @@
* @a: a type-name
* Return the minimum alignment required by the platform ABI for values of the given
* Return the minimal alignment required by the platform ABI for values of the given
* type. The address of a variable or struct member of the given type must always be
* a multiple of this alignment. For example, most platforms require int variables
* to be aligned at a 4-byte boundary, so `G_ALIGNOF (int)` is 4 on most platforms.
* Note this is not necessarily the same as the value returned by GCC’s
* `__alignof__` operator, which returns the preferred alignment for a type.
* The preferred alignment may be a stricter alignment than the minimal
* alignment.
* Since: 2.60
......@@ -406,12 +406,14 @@
/* Provide G_ALIGNOF alignment macro.
* Note we cannot use the gcc __alignof__ operator here, as that returns the
* preferred alignment rather than the minimal alignment. See
#if defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112L && !defined(__cplusplus)
#define G_ALIGNOF(type) _Alignof (type)
#elif defined(__GNUC__)
#define G_ALIGNOF(type) (__alignof__ (type))
#define G_ALIGNOF(type) (G_STRUCT_OFFSET (struct { char a; type b; }, b))
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment