This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libstdc++/10783: std::vector::reverse_iterator could be smaller
- From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 18 May 2003 19:36:00 -0000
- Subject: Re: libstdc++/10783: std::vector::reverse_iterator could be smaller
- Reply-to: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at unitus dot it>
The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/10783; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@unitus.it>
To: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, Sylvain.Pion@mpi-sb.mpg.de, ncm@cantrip.org,
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: libstdc++/10783: std::vector::reverse_iterator could be smaller
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 21:35:50 +0200
Well, on second thought, and giving justice to the clear
explanation in V&J, in their §16.2.2 it is clearly stated
that the EBCO has no equivalent for data members: this is
reasonable considering that it would create problems with
the representation of pointers to members.
Therefore reverse_iterator is expected to have the same
size of its iterator empty base (thanks to EBCO) + the size
of its member current, that is two times the size of a
plain iterator.
Do you agree?
Paolo.
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10783