Brad Pierce wrote: [...] > > If I understand the proposal correctly, it just says you can have as > many forward typedefs in a scope and put them anywhere, although the > practice seems faulty and confusing to me. It only allows for one > final type definition, which is then applied to all forward typedefs, > wherever they might be placed within the same scope. Is this correct? Yes that is correct. The practice is certainly confusing; the only reason to allow it is to allow use of include files with forward types and where includes of the file may follow the actual type. I don't like that practice, but don't think there is good reason to outlaw it. Gord. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Jun 8 07:48:03 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 08 2009 - 07:48:56 PDT