The cehck for vptr could be done differently (is this class dynamic and
its base class non-dynamic), and if we change the layout (to put the
vptr after any base) then this code will break (could add an assertion
that the vptr isn't present apart from at the start of the field list if
that'd seem worthwhile).
There's still later issues with lowering (if this patch causes crashes
in lowering, do they result in fuzz failures/need to be avoided before
this change is submitted?)
David Blaikie
d79a374ad4