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.
On 17/08/2019 23:02, sdkrystian via Std-Proposals wrote:
-------- Original message --------
From: Language Lawyer via Std-Proposals <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 8/17/19 16:39 (GMT-05:00)
Cc: Language Lawyer <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Allowing access to object representations
> > 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 list