[head tinderbox] failure on arm/arm

[Andrew Reilly]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 02:28:54AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> We don't have a lot of packed structs yet, and we should certainly
> have more of them.  :-)

Well, packed structs is one (non-portable) way to work around the fact
that C doesn't really support the use of structs for parsing external
(wire, file) data structures.  They're internal-use, abstract devices.  If
you want the code to be portable now and into the future, then you'll use
accessor macros that access the byte-stream explicitly, to build larger
data types.  Won't even have to do anything special for
endian-compatability, that way.

Yes, I realize that that's not the /traditional way/, and that there's a
hell of a lot of inappropriate struct code in there.

Cheers,

-- 
Andrew