This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] manage dom-walk_data initialization and finalization with constructors and destructors

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Michael Matz <> wrote:
>> > I'd also like us to not use member privatization in our classes, but
>> > that's not in the patch, but if we could agree on that it would be nice.
>> Member privatization is quite natural.  What specifically do you not like
>> about the practice?
> That was conditional on "when we need to jump through hoops", but for
> constistency it'd make sense to avoid it everywhere.
> (I know that Ian agreed to that mail, but somehow the mailing list
> archives don't have that!?)

I accidentally sent the e-mail in HTML mode, and it bounced.  I didn't
think it was important enough to resend.

But I wouldn't go so far as to say that we should never use private
members, just that I think it's better to use public members than to
contort the code to force them to be private.

In any case I do think that any discussion of this area should be with
regard to suggested changes to the coding conventions at .  Those conventions do say
"Prefer to make data members private" and "When structs and/or classes
have member functions, prefer to name data members with a trailing


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]