From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-389762-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 18013 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2012 01:46:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 18003 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Apr 2012 01:46:13 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:45:53 +0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/53097] [c++0x] Missed optimization: lambda closure object could be smaller
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:46:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Keywords Status Last reconfirmed Ever Confirmed Severity
Message-ID: <bug-53097-4-svn3bedb2s@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53097-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53097-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg02044.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53097

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |missed-optimization
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-04-24
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-24 01:45:51 UTC ---
The easy way to implement this would be something like:
include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
  struct {
  int a, b;
  };
  auto foo = [&](){return a + b;};
  printf("%d\n", (int)sizeof(foo));
  return 0;
}

and then only the pointer to the struct needs to be done for the closure.