An alternative could be to specify that objects of zero size do not have an object representation. I have suggested this before, however, people didn't seem that it was a good idea.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Language Lawyer via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> Date: 8/17/19 16:39 (GMT-05:00) To: std-proposals_at_[hidden] Cc: Language Lawyer <language.lawyer_at_[hidden]> Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Allowing access to object representations On 17/08/2019 23:02, sdkrystian via Std-Proposals wrote:> > But where the object representation of a zero size base class subobject of `o` will appear?> You seem to guarantee that it, despite having zero size, still has sizeof(T) ≠ 0 elements.> > It won't appear in the enclosing object (the wording only guarantees so for objects of nonzero size); specifying so would just be extraneous wording.A zero size base class subobject with nonzero elements in its object representation which do not "appear" in its enclosing object's representation sounds weird.-- Std-Proposals mailing listStd-Proposals_at_[hidden]://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals