possible structure layout bug

[Jie Zhang]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:06:19PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:47:06PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>Actually, isn't inheritence is by definition non-POD?
> 
> 
> Nope.  If I've got the right bit of the standard:
> 
>   A POD-struct is an aggregate class that has no non-static data
>   members of type pointer to member, non-POD-struct, non-POD-union (or
>   array of such types) or reference, and has no user-defined copy
>   assignment operator and no user-defined destructor.
> 
> Base classes are not listed.  This matches how I check in GDB for
> classes to pass by reference.
> 

But it is listed in the definition of aggregate, which is defined by the 
standard as following (8.5.1):

   An aggregate is an array or a class with no user-declared
   constructors, no private or protected non-static data members,
   no base classes, and no virtual functions.


-- 
Jie