Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!ulysses!hector!jss
From: jss@hector.UUCP (Jerry Schwarz)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: static members
Message-ID: <11106@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Date: 16 Jan 89 16:23:01 GMT
References: <507@aber-cs.UUCP> <8770@alice.UUCP> <4258@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Sender: netnews@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com
Reply-To: jss@hector.UUCP (Jerry Schwarz)
Distribution: eunet,world
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 25

In article <4258@paris.ics.uci.edu> Doug Schmidt <schmidt@pompe.ics.uci.edu> writes:
>
>Now that C++ provides more control over class data and function
>members isn't it time to consider adding control over the visibility
>of type declaration abstractions as well?  

It would clearly be desirable and it has been suggested many times
in the past.  

>
>   I suppose one reason this isn't already implemented is due to the
>fact that it might break existing C programs.  However, 
>

Possibly, but this is a minor consideration. The main reason, I
believe, is parsing.  It is non-trivial to write a C++ grammar when
you can count on the lexer to distinguish type identifiers from
ordinary identifiers.  (There are several cases, for example, where
the distinction between an expression and a declaration is tricky) It
is almost impossible if you can't. But its hard to get the lexer to
understand scoping.


Jerry Schwarz
AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill