Re: Existence Based Polymorphism

Tom Plunket <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.games.devel.sweng
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Stuart Golodetz and Richard Fabian wrote:
>> Does anyone need to worry about anything when the OS changes the
>> way FILE* is implemented?
>
> I hope I'm not oversimplifying your point, but are you essentially
> criticising the need to put a class's private members in the header file you
> supply to users (assuming you don't use the pimpl idiom)? If so, then I
> agree that it's annoying. That's more a C++ problem than an OO problem
> though.

I think that's a major thrust of the argument, though; as long as we
are constrained largely by the need to use the tools that we have
(e.g. where's the BetterLanguage compiler for PS3?), the OO problems
of C++ are real, unavoidable, and in some ways transitive.  E.g. it
doesn't matter if "functionality X" is actually a failure of OO or a
failure of C++'s spin on OO, it's a failure for those of us stuck with
the tools that we have.

So- C++ requiring private data to be shared with the world is
annoying, and it may not be particuarly OO, but it's fair to state
that that is a problem in OO given the tools that we use.  IMHO.


-tom!

--
_______________________________________________
Sweng-Gamedev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.