From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: CLOS and information hiding
Date: 1997/03/04
Message-ID: <3066504161340700@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 223110280
References: <01bc13dc$cfaa2b20$0f02000a@gjchome.nis.newscorp.com>     <330512CF.6458@acm.org> <330664CD.2AEA@cc.umanitoba.ca>     <330b4d8a.7824414@news.wam.umd.edu>     <5etf3a$bjs$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <33151E7D.58C3@research.nokia.com>     <3066031941459593@naggum.no> <gmpvxmeacq.fsf_-_@pelle.som.fi>     <3066034061855177_-_@naggum.no> <gmn2sqe7gk.fsf@pelle.som.fi>     <1997Mar3.091715.12836@wavehh.hanse.de> <gmrahwccoj.fsf@pelle.som.fi> <5fi01s$8cr@fido.asd.sgi.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313; http://www.naggum.no
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp


* Mike McDonald
| One of the things that always annoyed me about C++ class declarations was
| the requirement to include all of the private data and member functions
| in the public interface spec.  (Yes, I understand why it's there.)  It
| just seems wrong to be publicly advertising your private parts.

this has annoyed Bjarne Stroustrup, as well.  see his book The Design and
Evolution of C++.  consider that published interfaces can be inherited, but
private parts cannot.  it would make sense to inherit from a class that had
the published interface into a class with the private parts necessary to
implement it.  few do this, however.

#\Erik
-- 
if you think big enough, you never have to do it