From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-12-04 23:43:11
Andrey Semashev wrote:
> I think, fixed_string<0> should be specialized to an empty class. Not that
> I have a specific use case for fixed_string<0>, but making the class empty
> in general is useful for EBO and [[non_unique_address]] and e.g. tuples
> that employ these techniques.
Since values of the same type can't have the same address, you'll be gaining
at most one byte per tuple even if you put 1089 fixed_string<0>s in it.
Although I suppose tuple<unsigned long, fixed_string<0>> can be 8 bytes
instead of 16.
My position here is as it has always been; when an actual user asks for this
and provides an actual use case in which it leads to actual measurable
benefits, add it. Otherwise, not.