home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: druid.borland.com!usenet
- From: pete@borland.com (Pete Becker)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: on OO differnces between Ada95 and C++
- Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:01:39 GMT
- Organization: Borland International
- Message-ID: <4gi413$qo1@druid.borland.com>
- References: <4gbq7q$g08@qualcomm.com> <3129F185.41C6@Rational.COM>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: pbecker.borland.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
-
- In article <3129F185.41C6@Rational.COM>, jDesquilbet@Rational.COM says...
- >
- >- you may have several different definitions for the same class in the
- >same program, as long as they are never compiled together in the same
- >compilation unit; example:
- >
- >#define private public // *** BERK! ***
- >#include "...h" // second definition for the same class
- >#undef private
-
- This is not true. A program that attempts to do this violates the one
- definition rule, so it is not a legal C++ program.
- -- Pete
-
-