Order of bits in c++ record and masm record

[ToutEnMasm]

Hello,
It seems that bits in record in c++ are in reverse order than masm
here is a sample.Is it the same rule for all the record ?   (8,16,32,64..)

typedef struct _LDT_ENTRY {
    WORD    LimitLow;
    WORD    BaseLow;
    union {
        struct {
            BYTE    BaseMid;
            BYTE    Flags1;     // Declare as bytes to avoid alignment
            BYTE    Flags2;     // Problems.
            BYTE    BaseHi;
        } Bytes;
        struct {
            DWORD   BaseMid : 8;
            DWORD   Type : 5;
            DWORD   Dpl : 2;
            DWORD   Pres : 1;
            DWORD   LimitHi : 4;
            DWORD   Sys : 1;
            DWORD   Reserved_0 : 1;
            DWORD   Default_Big : 1;
            DWORD   Granularity : 1;
            DWORD   BaseHi : 8;
        } Bits;
    } HighWord;
} LDT_ENTRY, *PLDT_ENTRY;

LDTBits RECORD  rBaseHi:8,\
      Granularity:1,\
      Default_Big : 1,\
      Reserved_0:1,Sys:1,\
      LimitHi:4,Pres:1,\
      Dpl:2,\
      S_bit:1,\
      Type1:4,\

[redskull]

yes, it's is fact that the bitrecord in masm is 100% reverse from that of C++.  Why they use two different ways is beyond me, but everything in the Win32 API has to get declared in reverse order, e.g. MASM is high to low, C is low to high.  Go figure.

For C, from http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ewwyfdbe.aspx
"The ordering of data declared as bit fields is from low to high bit, as shown in the figure above."

from the MASM programmers guide:
"The first field in the declaration always goes into the most significant bits of the record. Subsequent fields are placed to the right in the succeeding bits"

-alan