Robert Kawulak wrote:
Hi John,
However, I did notice that the empty-base-optimisation has been incorrectly applied - so for example sizeof(bounded_int<int, 0, 100>::type) is 8 when compiled with msvc (ie even with EBO support).
AFAICT the EBO support is tuned fine and on GCC it works as expected. I too was getting a bit worse results with MSVC, but I suspect this is rather the fault of MSVC. However, if I missed something, I'd be grateful for pointing me to the place which is the problem.
At present you have: compressed_pair<empty1, empty2> member1; T member2; Whether or not "member1" is treated as empty by the compiler depends upon the ABI used. If you used a single data member consisting of nested compressed_pair's: compressed_pair< compressed_pair<definitely_not_empty, maybe_empty1>, maybe_empty2> single member; Then you would get EBO on more compilers IMO.
But... no documentation on the concepts used by the library, and of course suitable concept archetypes should be used to test the library.
Which concepts do you have in mind -- the policies or things like CopyConstructible? The policies are described in the documentation of constrained class template. Did I miss something there?
I was thinking of the interface required to be provided by the constraint-checking and error-handling template parameters, perhaps I missed it? I realise it was mostly covered by the examples/tutorial, but I didn't see a reference page for these? Cheers, John.