Re: __property keyword support in GCC

[Jamie Lokier <jamie dot lokier at cern dot ch>]

Joe Buck wrote:
> [ Re: implementation of Borland properties with a helper class ]
> 
> > A sufficiently good compiler would optimize this kind of helper class
> > object away in any case (though we aren't there yet).
> 
> Actually, in this case, there doesn't seem to be a way to get rid of
> the extra storage for the pointer, since this helper object would be
> a member.

Something involving `offsetof' comes to mind...  Unfortunately GCC will
still not optimise the structure down to zero bytes.

> Not that this changes my mind, though, since I think it's better to
> show the actual calls to the member functions in the code rather than
> try to hide them.

There are some cases where the accessor function doesn't have any side
effects -- it simply does a computation or a type conversion using
another value.

In those cases, especially the type conversions, the caller really
doesn't need to know the underlying mechanism.

-- Jamie