Visibility of C++ class private symbols (as compared to static)

[John Carter]

On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Vivenzio Pagliari wrote:

> In theory, class Foo could be implemented in different compilation
> units and thus require external linkage of the symbols. Even more,
> the resulting object code could be split up in different libraries
> (eg. Foo::bar(int) in libfoo1.so and Foo::s_ in libfoo2.so),
> requiring eg. the entries in the dynamic symbol table.
> But who does this or who needs this??

I suspect nobody does and nobody should, but to change the compiler so 
that it didn't would make it non-standard. (I can imagine one place where 
I would use that feature, suppose some of the class implementation is 
crafted by hand, some of it generated.)

Conversely it shouldn't ever be a problem to you unless you are getting 
name space conflicts. At which point you should start using the namespace 
feature of the standard anyway.

-- 


John Carter                             Phone : (64)(3) 358 6639
Tait Electronics                        Fax   : (64)(3) 359 4632
PO Box 1645 Christchurch                Email : john.carter@tait.co.nz
New Zealand

Good Ideas:
Ruby                 - http://www.ruby-lang-org - The best of perl,python,scheme without the pain.
Valgrind             - http://developer.kde.org/~sewardj/ - memory debugger for x86-GNU/Linux
Free your books      - http://www.bookcrossing.com