From 5767804802683649445 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,6f042a6ff823c6a0 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!proxad.net!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull From: stkim@yujinrobot.com ("Kim, Seungtai") Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Relation of enermy(anti-friend) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:54:34 GMT Organization: Korea Research Environment Open Network Lines: 56 Sender: mail2news@demon.net Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <42gsi09guhr518kkffinjpo5f5qaos07gl@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1093661679 22611 158.152.254.254 (28 Aug 2004 02:54:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:54:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Priority: 3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64-mulga_r1 (2004-01-11) on mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=2.64-mulga_r1 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id i7S2sYkI022478; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:54:34 +1000 (EST) X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 04:45:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Level: X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Spamscanner: mailbox4.ucsd.edu (v1.4 May 20 2004 13:55:33, 0.7/5.0 2.63) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-MailScanner: PASSED (v1.2.8 66569 i7R4jgk6072295 mailbox4.ucsd.edu) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:2258 "Bob Hairgrove" > This ("enemy") is actually the correct spelling, not "enermy". Thanks for correction. My mis-spelling. > I think "public" should really mean "available for everyone". Yes. And I assert that the mean "avaliable for everyone" can be easily extented to "available for everone except enemy". > Limiting > access to class members can be done by other means, for example making > all members private and listing only those classes as friends which > are allowed to access the data. But, it may be hard to limit a few classes or functions in a extreamly large scale project. Don't you ever see that the project has thousands classes and functions? > Or you can use a common base class and > make the otherwise "public" members "protected". I think that it is another subject. Why do you thinks that it can be the solution in the situation? > Or using anonymous namespaces, Scope problem is arised. Only classes in same translation unit can access them. > nested classes, etc. Nested class dose not mean the relation. Never it can represent the relation. > Once something is declared "public", however, there is no turning > back. So, IMHO, why it can not be? It can provide new notion to our logical design issus. > And I believe it is a good thing because it makes you think > about your classes' designs a bit more. Thanks for your opinion. -- S Kim --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]