RE: Re: Query regarding unusual behaviour for tail padding with different c++ standards

2021-12-13 Thread Nayan Deshmukh via Gcc
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 05:14, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 9:04 PM Nayan Deshmukh via Gcc   > >wrote: > > > #include  > > > #include  > > > #include  > > > struct A { > > >   int a; > > >   uint64_t b; > > >   int c = -1; > > > }; > > > > The question becomes is the above 

Re: Query regarding unusual behaviour for tail padding with different c++ standards

2021-12-13 Thread Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 05:14, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 9:04 PM Nayan Deshmukh via Gcc > wrote: > > #include > > #include > > #include > > struct A { > > int a; > > uint64_t b; > > int c = -1; > > }; > > The question becomes is the above a standard layout class or

Re: Query regarding unusual behaviour for tail padding with different c++ standards

2021-12-12 Thread Andrew Pinski via Gcc
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 9:04 PM Nayan Deshmukh via Gcc wrote: > #include > #include > #include > struct A { > int a; > uint64_t b; > int c = -1; > }; The question becomes is the above a standard layout class or not. I Noticed clang does not change the rules for layout between C++11 and C