Notes from 14 October -- RTTI offset

[Jim Dehnert]

Matt Austern wrote:
>                               ISSUE B-6
> 
> (3) When we discussed issue B-8, we agreed that we would have an
> offset to typeinfo object rather than a pointer to typeinfo object.
> This means that the typeinfo object is now part of the vtable.  It
> will go at the very beginning, i.e. at a negative offset from where
> the vtpr points.  (Comment: We discussed B-6 before discussing B-8.
> Does making this change interfere with having a uniform vtable offset,
> since we won't have a typeinfo object at the beginning of a vtable
> for a nonpolymorphic class with virtual bases?  Should we revisit
> decision (2) or (3), or am I just being paranoid?)

I thought we needed the RTTI pointer to be unique so it can be compared.
Am I remembering incorrectly?