Re: VTTs, yet again

[dehnert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Jim Dehnert)]

> From mitchell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  Sun May 21 09:37:09 2000
> 
> >>>>> "Jim" == Jim Dehnert <dehnert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>     >> From: Mark Mitchell <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >> 
>     >> The description of the VTT (in VTT order) doesn't specify which
>     >> vptrs point into the main vtable group and which into
>     >> construction vtable groups.  It should.
> 
>     Jim> I don't think it needs to.  The VTT is the interface, and we
>     Jim> describe how it is used.  You are free to make a construction
>     Jim> vtable for every subobject if you like -- it will just be
>     Jim> often suboptimal.
> 
> Fair enough.  
> 
> But, I think we should add the rule I gave in a non-normative note;
> it's good to have concrete suggestions for implementors.

I've added verbiage with this intent towards the end of 2.6.2.  See
what you think.

Jim

-	    Jim Dehnert		dehnert@xxxxxxx
				(650)933-4272