Re: Object in this mirror may appear smaller than they are

Article View: comp.std.c++

Article #691

#691

From: Andrew Koenig
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 13:44

11 lines
940 bytes

In article <RWK.92Oct7181545@silver.sbi.com> rwk@silver.sbi.com (Richard W. Kreutzer Consultant) writes:

> This is not the real problem - assuming "class foo" above is indeed empty, by
> definition, can someone please explain to me the rational for requiring an
> "empty" class to be of size > 0?

Because C requires it and no one has pointed out a good enough reason
to break C compatibility on this issue.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com

Technical Details

Message-ID: <23846@alice.att.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!convex!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!yale.edu!think.com!rpi!bu.edu!att!att!allegra!alice!ark

References: <RWK.92Oct7181545@silver.sbi.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!convex!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!yale.edu!think.com!rpi!bu.edu!att!att!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Object in this mirror may appear smaller than they are
Message-ID: <23846@alice.att.com>
Date: 9 Oct 92 13:44:21 GMT
References: <RWK.92Oct7181545@silver.sbi.com>
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Distribution: comp
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 11

Reply to Parent Message