home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: mfinney@inmind.com
- Message-ID: <4i7qjr$gr7@mujibur.inmind.com>
- X-Original-Date: 14 Mar 1996 00:52:11 GMT
- Path: in2.uu.net!bounce-back
- Date: 13 Mar 96 23:53:07 GMT
- Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Anyone considered inheritable friendship?
- Organization: In Mind, Inc.
- References: <4fnrfr$7b1@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM> <AFwV3Hn027@qsar.chem.msu.su>
- Reply-To: mfinney@inmind.com
- X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBFAgUBMUdf++EDnX0m9pzZAQHndwF+LE4U60eT0p0yFtQ8FLi40MJZzscE2hnU
- xtRMQdH8nERv3ZoMOhWJHo68S4dQdz7i
- =xjjC
-
- In <AFwV3Hn027@qsar.chem.msu.su>, "Eugene Radchenko" <eugene@qsar.chem.msu.su>
- writes:
- >But it is not. Inheritable friendship is a natural extension of normal
- >friendship (for tightly coupled classes) to tightly coupled hierarchies.
-
- Exactly. And, not only have I considered, I have begged for it
- on bended knee. I frequently encounter the tightly coupled
- hierarchy situation and it would REALLY make my life easier
- and my code cleaner.
-
- I suggested once that the keyword "friends" should indicate that
- the friendship could be inherited and "friend" would indicate
- that it is non-inheritable. And it is NOT the same thing as making
- the attributes public. It is the same thing as making them
- protected in another hierarchy.
-
-
- Michael Lee Finney
- ---
- [ 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 ]
- [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]
- [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
- [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]
-