Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?

Subject: Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-31 19:13:53

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:07 PM, rstewart <rstewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> "Emil Dotchevski" <emildotchevski_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Rob Stewart <rstewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > > On May 31, 2016 5:10:35 PM EDT, Emil Dotchevski <
> emildotchevski_at_[hidden]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >header:
> > > >
> > > >struct foo { int critical_; };
> > > >shared_ptr<foo> create_foo();
> > > >inline void use_foo_critical( foo * p ) { ++p->critical_; }
> > > >void use_foo_not_so_critical( foo * )
> > >
> > > Were you leaving encapsulation as an exercise for the reader?
> > >
> > > class foo
> > > {
> > > public:
> > >    use_critical () { ++critical_; }
> > > protected:
> > >    int critical_;
> > > };
> > >
> > > Your foo_ can still access critical_.
> >
> > Right, though my preference is as follows.
> >
> > //Public interface:
> >
> > namespace boost { template <class> class shared_ptr; }
> > class foo;
> > boost::shared_ptr<foo> create_foo();
> > void use_foo_critical( foo * );
> > void use_foo_not_so_critical( foo * );
> >
> > //Implementation details:
> >
> > class foo
> > {
> >   foo( foo const & );
> >   foo & operator=( foo const & );
> >   int critical_;
> >   friend void use_foo_critical( foo * );
> > protected:
> >   foo();
> >   ~foo();
> > };
> > inline void use_foo_critical( foo * p ) { ++p->critical_; }
>
> That doesn't provide inline access to those with access only to the header.
>

I meant that whole thing being in the header, which is required for inline
access (within the CPP file inline is next to pointless since the compiler
can easily inline any function.) The point I'm making with
"//implementation details" is that the fact that use_foo_critical is
defined inline, as well as the exact definition of foo itself, is not part
of the interface and thus subject to change.

Emil