Ah - so this brings me to the next thing I was going to suggest, which
is to move inline method bodies out of the class definition (also
suggested in the Ellemtel standard [1]) If we do that, it also solves
the "want to keep parameter name for documentation reason, but need to
remove it because it's unused in the inline method body" problem. Like so:
class Foo
{
public:
explicit Foo(std::string &name_in);
void doSomething(int x, int y);
private:
std::string name;
};
inline void Foo::doSomething(int x, int)
{
string new_name(name);
for(int num= 0; num < x; ++num)
{
new_name.append(name);
}
name= new_name;
}
This way our classes start to be more readable as interfaces but we keep
inline functions in the headers for the speed reasons.
Thoughts?
[1] http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/lab/cplus/c++.rules/chap6.html#sect2
Eric Day wrote:
> In the case that some private vars are required before public/protected
> methods (inline methods), is it preferred to put *all* vars in a
> private section before the methods, or only the ones required? I
> would say all vars so you don't have two var sections, and to make
> packing possibly more efficient.
>
> While I agree with public before private for API readability,
> I still am not sure this is the most practical. Because the
> inline-requiring-private-vars case is somewhat common, I would almost
> propose private before public so we don't have a bunch of classes
> with what looks like different styles.
>
> Also, I'm not saying language designers are always correct in their
> vision, but the fact that the 'default' access level is private may
> say something about what should come first. :)
>
> I could go either way.
>
> -Eric
>
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 01:01:05PM -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> ++
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Monty Taylor <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Padraig O'Sullivan wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > I was working on a class today in Drizzle and wasn't sure what the
>> > coding standard is with regard to declaration order i.e. public before
>> > private or private before public. There is a sub-section on this in
>> > the coding standards right now which indicates no conclusion was made:
>> >
>> > http://drizzle.org/wiki/Coding_Standards#Declaration_Order
>> >
>> > Personally, I prefer public before private. But I'd like to at least
>> > choose one order and place it in the coding standards so we can be
>> > consistent.
>>
>> Both the Google C++ coding standards [1] and the Ellemtel C++ standards
>> [2] require public: then protected: then private:. [3][4] I tend to
>> agree... when I start reading a class def, I'm usually looking for API
>> first, and I can read further if I want to see implementation details.
>>
>> So my vote is to swipe the text from the Google standard (I like their
>> supplementary text too.
>>
>> [1] http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml
>> [2] http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/lab/cplus/c++.rules/
>> [3]
>>
>> http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml#Declaration_Order
>> [4] http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/lab/cplus/c++.rules/chap6.html#sect1
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
>> Post to A A : [email protected]
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
>> More help A : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
>> Post to : [email protected]
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
