Where can I use alignas() in C++11?

by

I think you just placed the alignas in the wrong position. If you move it directly after the identifier, both GCC and Clang are happy and apply the alignment:

typedef float aligned_block alignas(16) [4];
typedef float aligned_block [4] alignas(16);

this is also true if you use using, where the difference also becomes more apparent. Here are two versions that are not accepted by GCC (warning, alignment ignored):

using aligned_block = float alignas(16)[4];
using aligned_block = float[4] alignas(16);

and here’s the accepted one:

using aligned_block alignas(16) = float[4];

I think that GCC applies

7.1.3 The typedef specifier [dcl.typedef]

2 A typedef-name can also be introduced by an alias-declaration. The identifier following the using keyword becomes a typedef-name and the optional attribute-specifier-seq following the identifier appertains to that typedef-name. It has the same semantics as if it were introduced by the typedef specifier. […]

(emphasis mine)

The above is quite clear for using, the rules for typedef are spread through several paragraphs, including at the end of §8.3/1, where you find:

8.3 Meaning of declarators [dcl.meaning]

1 […] The optional attribute-specifier-seq following a declarator-id appertains to the entity that is declared.

(again, emphasis mine)

Update: The above answer concentrated on where the alignas has to be placed, not on its exact meaning. After thinking about it some more, I still think that the above should be valid. Consider:

7.6.2 Alignment Specifier [dcl.align]

1An alignment-specifier may be applied to a variable or to a class data member, but it shall not be applied to a bit-field, a function parameter, an exception-declaration (15.3), or a variable declared with the register storage class specifier. An alignment-specifier may also be applied to the declaration or definition of a class (in an elaborated-type-specifier (7.1.6.3) or class-head (Clause 9), respectively) and to the declaration or definition of an enumeration (in an opaque-enum-declaration or enum-head, respectively (7.2)). An alignment-specifier with an ellipsis is a pack expansion (14.5.3).

It lists cases where it can be clearly applied and it lists cases where it clearly can not be applied. The above question’s example is neither.

One could also argue that the type alias created by typedef or using is carrying the alignment specification as part of the aliased type. This alias can than be used to create a variable, etc. as allowed by 7.6.2p1 but not to create a variable with register, etc.

In that sense I think that the attribute specifier is applied (in the sense of 7.6.2) in a deferred way and thus OPs example should still be valid when the alignment specification is put in the syntactically correct place.

More Related Contents:

  1. How can you iterate over the elements of an std::tuple?
  2. Implementation C++14 make_integer_sequence
  3. Range based loop: get item by value or reference to const?
  4. Does C++ support Variable Length Arrays?
  5. Should the trailing return type syntax style become the default for new C++11 programs? [closed]
  6. How to automatically convert strongly typed enum into int?
  7. Why use non-member begin and end functions in C++11?
  8. How to implement multithread safe singleton in C++11 without using
  9. Replacement for deprecated register keyword C++ 11
  10. Why can I not brace initialize a struct derived from another struct?
  11. no match for ‘operator
  12. static constexpr member of same type as class being defined
  13. How to guarantee order of argument evaluation when calling a function object?
  14. Are move constructors produced automatically?
  15. What is the reason for not being able to deduce array size from initializer-string in member variable?
  16. Is std::abs(0u) ill-formed?
  17. Compile time triggered range check for std::vector
  18. Static constexpr odr-used or not?
  19. C++: Can a macro expand “abc” into ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’?
  20. Is there a compiler bug exposed by my implementation of an is_complete type trait?
  21. When is a const reference better than pass-by-value in C++11?
  22. Range-based for with brace-initializer over non-const values?
  23. std::forward_list and std::forward_list::push_back
  24. How to typedef a template class? [duplicate]
  25. Using C++ base class constructors?
  26. C++ std::tuple order of destruction
  27. Reference invalidation after applying reverse_iterator on a custom made iterator
  28. C++11 Implementation of Spinlock using header “
  29. Move semantics == custom swap function obsolete?
  30. How to assert if a std::mutex is locked?

Leave a Comment