>> >The reason would be to keep the implementation details of
>the structure
>> >private so that people aren't tempted to access the fields
>> >directly. All
>> >the caller gets is an opaque handle. Think of it as
>'objects lite' for
>> >C.
>>
>> I could understand the OO construction if we were using C++
>> but in strict K&R when you need to have access elements in
>> a struct you need to know about them ?)
>
>Not in the case we are passing the address.
>
>>
>> The goal is to have functions defs in .c and data defs in .h
>> preparing scandoc task
>
>Scandoc should not be the reason to change the sources.
>
>>
>> So what about that repartition ?
>
>I am starting to be -1 about this repartition. Due to the risk
>of #include of
>something that should remain private in one source file.
OK, you two, Andy/JF convinced me to OOing also in standard C ;;;)))
