Empty Base Class Optimization

suggest change

An object cannot occupy less than 1 byte, as then the members of an array of this type would have the same address. Thus sizeof(T)>=1 always holds. It's also true that a derived class cannot be smaller than any of its base classes. However, when the base class is empty, its size is not necessarily added to the derived class:

class Base {};

class Derived : public Base
    int i;

In this case, it's not required to allocate a byte for Base within Derived to have a distinct address per type per object. If empty base class optimization is performed (and no padding is required), then sizeof(Derived) == sizeof(int), that is, no additional allocation is done for the empty base. This is possible with multiple base classes as well (in C++, multiple bases cannot have the same type, so no issues arise from that).

Note that this can only be performed if the first member of Derived differs in type from any of the base classes. This includes any direct or indirect common bases. If it's the same type as one of the bases (or there's a common base), at least allocating a single byte is required to ensure that no two distinct objects of the same type have the same address.

Feedback about page:

Optional: your email if you want me to get back to you:

Table Of Contents