[...] > > > > "Michael D. Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Are inline constructors and assignment operators ok? > > > They are very short, but I head that there may be a problem. > > > > The problems, if any, are the same as for other member functions: > > > > Conceptually, encapsulation is at least partially broken if a class > > reveals (part of) its implementation details. > > > > "Physically", modifications on an inline member function require > > tranlation units depending on the definition of the > member's class to > > be recompiled. Modifications of encapsulated member functions' > > definitions only require the translation unit containing > the modified > > member functions' definitions to be recompiled. This can be a huge > > difference. > > My inline methods are kept in separate files are included at > the bottom of the .hh files. How does this impact condiderations > of encapsulation and recompile time. > > Additionally, while I did not originally say so, my main concern > is execution performance. Are there any issues here? > > Thanks, > Mike. >
My apologies. I did not notice that this list is inappropriately set to prefer private replies. Mike. -- Michael D. Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Help-gplusplus mailing list Help-gplusplus@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gplusplus
