On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 02:04:37AM +0100, Tristan Wibberley wrote:
> If the programmer had intended that the type should appear to not exist.
> it wouldn't be defined in a header #include-able by client code. The
GCC doesn't know if the header is includable by client code; I assume
that's the use Jason intended for marking classes hidden ("it belongs
to this shared object and no one else can see it").
> In the examples above, client code that knows (via headers) that the
> classes exist should be able to get pointers to instances via exported
> functions, access any visible or virtual members, and pass the pointers
> back into visible functions of the shared object - or even dereference
> the pointers to pass by reference.
So... what does it restrict, then? Is it just defaulting methods to
hidden, as a strange form of access control?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
