From -7652681543353326269 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fc772,e4551d1072848803 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc772,public X-Google-Thread: f78e5,e4551d1072848803 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-04 20:58:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!usenet.net.nz!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!news.xtra.co.nz!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.unimelb.edu.au!bounce-back From: Sungbom Kim Newsgroups: comp.std.c++,comp.lang.c++.moderated Subject: Re: Omitting the access specifier of a base class Date: 05 Dec 01 04:57:38 GMT Organization: KrLine Internet Service, Inc.(http://www.krline.net) Lines: 29 Approved: Fergus Henderson Message-ID: <3C0AC9AD.9A2F26A4@bawi.org> References: <3C051430.3AE0E9C2@bawi.org> <721ff0b.0111291627.59b46888@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: mundook.cs.mu.oz.au X-Trace: ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au 1007528275 27166 128.250.29.16 (5 Dec 2001 04:57:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.unimelb.edu.au NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Dec 2001 04:57:55 GMT X-Original-Date: 3 Dec 2001 00:44:47 -0500 X-Submission-Address: c++-submit@netlab.cs.rpi.edu X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.lang.c++.moderated iQBVAwUAPAsRSkHMCo9UcraBAQGUmQH/fl7WS7/eGXTOSHFhL5SNnZPihJ/PGar7 hwerc24BOMEuCBjZFtaaNzxnxO67xn3ON/Hr9I7Zx8SaEzGGDnVCBQ== =CwPJ 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 Content-Length: 1240 X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ iQBFAgUAPA2pRuEDnX0m9pzZAQGhiAGAmm/yezwVdDFBuPdNyF3yT2T953gAZzb5 AeB4LIowe4nnuAQqNf/q8qioZlQYU6Kd =6UPn Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:8484 comp.lang.c++.moderated:31887 Sean Kelly wrote: > > Sungbom Kim wrote in message news:<3C051430.3AE0E9C2@bawi.org>... > > Wouldn't there be any possibility that the next standard would > > declare the omission of the access specifier to be deprecated, > > as was the case with implicit int for function return types? > > Not in this case, because again, the C++ compiler would not be able to > compile C code containg struct declarations (as C does not have access > specifiers). Whether C-compatibility is a desirable feature to > continue to support, however, is another discussion. C compatibility is irrelevant here, since as Adam Peterson said, if you are inheriting, you're doing C++ anyway. -- Sungbom Kim [ 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. ]