--- Comment #1 from david dot rosenborg at pantor dot com 2008-10-07 08:42
---
Created an attachment (id=16474)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16474action=view)
Preprocessed program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37762
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-10-07 08:46
---
Do you have evidence that this is a bug given the detailed specifications of
the ABI document:
http://www.codesourcery.com/public/cxx-abi/
???
I have trouble believing it, and just checked that other
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-10-07 09:48
---
(In reply to comment #3)
Now, in layman's terms, is the reason for the padding that no two distinct
instances of Empty may share the same address? If that is the case, it would
explain the padding and this
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-10-07 10:45 ---
Subject: Re: Member variable of empty base optimized (EBO) class appears on
wrong offset
Iirc there are some pod vs non pod issues here dealing wit padding and
the c++ standard and not even the abi.
Sent from my
--- Comment #3 from david dot rosenborg at pantor dot com 2008-10-07 09:31
---
Ah, no, I wasn't aware of that document. I just thought that gcc was treating
the Good and Bad cases inconsitently.
Now, in layman's terms, is the reason for the padding that no two distinct
instances of
Iirc there are some pod vs non pod issues here dealing wit padding and
the c++ standard and not even the abi.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 7, 2008, at 2:31 AM, david dot rosenborg at pantor dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Comment #3 from david dot rosenborg at pantor dot com
