Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard (jbms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-18 19:58:56

On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 07:00:56PM -0500, David Abrahams wrote:
> FWIW, I don't think it would be smart to put *too* many eggs in this
> basket. Because XTI is based on debug symbol information, it is
> neccessarily limited in certain ways that a full-compiler-based
> solution is not. For example, I'm fairly certain that some details
> unneccessary for debugging like access control
> (public/private/protected) are dropped.

For fields, I do not think it is particularly useful to provide access
exclusively to the actual instance variables. It seems, however, that
access control specifiers of public, private, and protected are not
useful, however, because first of all, it seems that it would be
nearly impossible to enforce such control, and also I do not see how
it would be useful. There should really be no need to publish
anything but public fields.

- Jeremy Maitin-Shepard

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at