From -1451004324737599610 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,e4551d1072848803 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-Thread: fc772,e4551d1072848803 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc772,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-19 02:56:08 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.unimelb.edu.au!bounce-back From: Francis Glassborow Newsgroups: comp.std.c++,comp.lang.c++.moderated Subject: Re: Omitting the access specifier of a base class Date: 19 Dec 01 10:55:46 GMT Organization: Southfield Microcomputer SS Lines: 29 Approved: Fergus Henderson Message-ID: References: <3C051430.3AE0E9C2@bawi.org> <3C061364.9968E1B3@s2.chalmers.se> <3c06ea42.15047417@news.ntlworld.com> <156b8737.0112111616.748fc4b8@posting.google.com> <3c1aa1bb.1476763@news.ntlworld.com> <3C1DBB18.3CF5E1F4@ihug.co.nz> Reply-To: Francis Glassborow NNTP-Posting-Host: mundook.cs.mu.oz.au X-Trace: ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au 1008759361 7782 128.250.29.16 (19 Dec 2001 10:56:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.unimelb.edu.au NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:56:01 GMT X-Original-Date: 18 Dec 2001 08:47:11 -0500 X-Submission-Address: c++-submit@netlab.cs.rpi.edu X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.lang.c++.moderated iQBVAwUAPB9I20HMCo9UcraBAQFoQwIAnO2eyRITducTMJ9nYX822jzn3zjMH/qx eqXS98syAGOrL/XnEOih5z6sObGilI9wbcEa6HlcU/iHHMd7v0NyKA== =GZIV X-WARNING-TO-MODERATORS: This article has been processed and accepted using a cryptographic program by the moderator of comp.lang.c++.moderated. Its content must not be changed or it will be automatically cancelled. If you don't like the article or its crossposting, return it to the submitter. (You can delete this message if you are the last moderator to see it.) X-Approved-For-Group: hsutter@acm.org comp.lang.c++.moderated X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ iQBFAgUAPCByNOEDnX0m9pzZAQGtcQF/WF6M0ojNDMyOu/vd5NS3P84IB8PU2fDy 4LkgN4wfu0cNm+p1cKjReg+YA49SO7O2 =g0KG Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:8671 comp.lang.c++.moderated:33061 In article <3C1DBB18.3CF5E1F4@ihug.co.nz>, Ross Smith writes >> Read paragraph 4 of clause 9 of the C++ Standard that defines POD struct >> and union types. Nowhere does it say anything about constructors, > >Not so: a POD struct is an aggregate, and 8.5.1 para 1 forbids >user-declared constructors for aggregates. Yes, I had missed that (partly because the backward reference precedes the sentence it is relevant to. I think we made a real pig's ear of the wording. Having a dtor and copy assignment for aggregates in general but not for PODs makes little sense to me. If you need a user defined dtor then it would be an odd design that did not need a copy ctor and copy assignment to be written as well. -- Francis Glassborow I offer my sympathy and prayers to all those who are suffering as a result of the events of September 11 2001. [ Send an empty e-mail to c++-help@netlab.cs.rpi.edu for info ] [ about comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: do this! ] [ 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.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ] [ Note that the FAQ URL has changed! Please update your bookmarks. ]