[boost] Re: Empty member optimization

From: Joao Abecasis (jpabecasis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-09 11:00:50

David Abrahams wrote:

 > I think the question is whether it's ever desirable to break the
 > current C++ invariant that no two objects of the same type will ever
 > share an address **in generic code** -- that is, when you don't know
 > anything about the assumptions that may be made by that type.

An alternative implementation is to privately inherit from the specified 
type for empty classes as compressed_pair does. This maintains the 
invariant but has the drawback that inheritance is visible in user code.

For a generic compressed_tuple the private inheritance should not be a 
problem.

João