[openbeos] Re: -Wmissing-prototypes

  • From: "Andrew Bachmann" <shatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 17:20:17 -0800 PST

"Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Andrew Bachmann" <shatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This seems like the winning suggestion to me.  Just another wacky C 
> > thing.
> > This is why I don't do drivers I guess. (heh)
> 
> That's not wacky, that's a useful feature. It's even something that's 
> missing (a bug in the specs as I would see it) in C++; you cannot 
> define a class only locally - it's always visible from the outside 
> until you strip the symbols manually.

This is not quite correct, I can have two files separately define the
same class with no qualifiers and have no problems linking-- or so
it seemed in my test case.  Personally I think that declaring things
to be static is the backwards way, [instead of explicitly granting
visibility] but my personal opinion doesn't count for much in this
arena. :-)

Andrew


Other related posts: