array new-expressions: proposal

[Martin von Loewis]

> We could just put in 16-byte padding for all types, but I think that's
> a waste.  There's no reason to do it.  It's just as easy to use 8-
> byte padding in general, and 16 only when we have to.

I'd like to repeat my proposal that there is *no padding* if the type
does not have a destructor. In that case, you could use the outcome of
operator new directly for arrays of char and unsigned char; the
multiple mentioned in 5.3.4/10 would be 0.

Regards,
Martin