[interfacekit] Re: BRoster & BWindow

"Erik Jaesler" <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]
> Since it was my proposal, it won't come as a surprise to anybody that 
> I 
> think we should move ahead with private accessor classes.  So, that 
> will 
> be the interface kit team's official policy.
> 
> A last note:  rather than declare them as members of the classes they 
> provide access to, I'd like to put them in the BPrivate namespace -- 
> like BLooperList.  The idea being that if you declare them as class 
> members, then they have to be in the public interface, and end-users 
> may 
> be tempted to use them.

That should turn out to be difficult, since the class is opaque in any 
case. :-P

An API user with a sufficent amount of criminal energy can abuse the 
private class anyway, regardless of whether it lives in the BPrivate 
namespace or in the class itself.

> Better to hide them away in BPrivate.

What I find a bit ugly with that solution is that you have to declare 
the class in the namespace in the public header (even before the 
definition of the main class).

CU, Ingo

Other related posts: