Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 16:29:51 09/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2003 at 17:42:28, Bo Persson wrote:
>On September 22, 2003 at 13:45:03, Anthony Cozzie wrote:
>
>>
>>You are going to have a hard time convincing me that
>
>I'm not trying to, I just like it much better myself.
>
>>
>>class a
>>{
>>public:
>> foo1();
>> foo2();
>
>I would of course also have some data here
>
>private:
> piece moved_piece;
> square from;
> square to;
>
>
>>};
>>
>>is better than:
>>
>>struct a;
>>
>>foo1(a*, ...);
>>foo2(a*, ...);
>>
>>etc.
>
>One obvious problem is that anyone can write
>
>void garble(a*, ...);
>
>that messes with the data. In the C++ case, this is not allowed.
>
>With a struct, someone (anyone!) can also write
In principle (and especially for large projects) I agree with you. But in this
particular case, someone = anyone = me ;)
anthony
>a_value.from = a7;
>
>and destroy the abstraction. Of course you would never do that, not even by
>mistake...
>
>>
>>To me these are the same. If you prefer the C++ syntax, that is of course your
>>option, of course.
>
>It's not just the syntax, it is also the added abstraction of a being a value
>type, not just a parameter that you pass around all the time.
>
>
>Bo Persson
>
>>
>>anthony
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.