This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Class definitions in C++
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- Cc: hahn at physics dot mcmaster dot ca, tm_gccmail at mail dot kloo dot net, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 05 Aug 2003 05:16:47 +0200
- Subject: Class definitions in C++
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <20030804222338.ED044F2D88@nile.gnat.com>
firstname.lastname@example.org (Robert Dewar) writes:
| > > pretty hard to do for the great majority of C++ (or Ada for that matter)
| > > programmers who have not the slightest awareness of machine language or
| > > its implications.
| > so since some programmers are imperfect,
| > none of them should get nice sharp tools? please, no!
| > C/C++, at least, have never shied from enough-rope features.
| > regards, mark hahn.
| Well I am not sure it is a matter of rope here. The idea that all class
| definitions in C++ should be regarded as potentially highly target
| instruction set dependent since the programmer is expected to analyze
| for a particular architecture what should and should not be inlined
| seems a bit gruesome.
A class definition need not contain a function definition. A class
defnition is needed only when the class is used in a way that requires