From 2696354924806112758 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,edd477ec92e5348f X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-Thread: fc772,ef0c226459c03bdf X-Google-Attributes: gidfc772,public From: Francis Glassborow Subject: Re: Protected Inheritance Date: 1999/02/05 Message-ID: <7sAoNOBfshu2EwFV@robinton.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 441110133 Approved: dom@devitto.demon.co.uk Sender: cppmods@netlab.cs.rpi.edu References: <79aesq$qlr$1@uuneo.neosoft.com> X-Submission-Address: c++-submit@netlab.cs.rpi.edu X-Approved-For-Group: Fergus Henderson comp.std.c++ X-Original-Date: 05 Feb 99 07:06:07 GMT Organization: Southfield Microcomputer SS X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.lang.c++.moderated iQBVAwUANrtQXkHMCo9UcraBAQGwhQH+M9c4FpMDqiYLDRvJ04Ok4TUeGfeIu9MB alNzpxwltCDn8RxNFzdVpMYTpxN4D2OnC4SPAkIM/d0n9RIdRooG/g== =i3aN Reply-To: Francis Glassborow Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++.moderated,comp.std.c++ In article , Scott Meyers writes >Does 12.6.2 really mean that private virtual base classes may be >initialized only by their immediate descendant classes (excluding >friendship issues)? I always understood that making a virtual base private was a waste of time because: class A {}; class B: private virtual A {}; class C: public virtual A, public B {}; now provides access to the private virtual base. Maybe my memory is at fault. Francis Glassborow Chair of Association of C & C++ Users 64 Southfield Rd Oxford OX4 1PA +44(0)1865 246490 All opinions are mine and do not represent those of any organisation --- [ 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://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]