Declaring template function friends involves some incredibly unintuitive syntax, even for C++! What is the rationale behind the choice of syntax for the extra <> needed? Wouldn\'t it make more s
I\'m trying to use the Pointer to Implementation Idiom to hide the fact that I am using a Concurrency::unbounded_buffer (from VC++ 2010). The problem is, I\'m doing it with templates and got stuck in
We\'re creating an object hierarchy where each item has a collection of other items, and each item also has a Parent property pointing to its parent item. Pretty standard stuff.We also have an ItemsCo
I have written/am writing a piece of physics analysis code, initially for myself, that will now hopefully be used and extended by a small group of physicists. None of us are C++ gurus. I have put toge
I\'m implementing several classes using the pimpl idiom and am coming across some design issues. Firstly, I\'ve always seen pimpl done like this
class private_object { private: struct make_public; friend struct make_public; static void method1() {} }; struct private_object::make_public
Is there a difference between declaring a friend function/class as private or public? I can\'t seem to find anything about this onli开发者_JAVA技巧ne.
I want to make an inner class a friend of an unrelated class but this doesn\'t seem to work (at least in gcc 4.1.2):
Is there any way to make certain variables in classes \"private\" (or whatever self.__var really is) but be accessible to another class, l开发者_运维百科ike friends in c++, except in python? I do not
In Thinking in C++ Volume 1, chapter 16: Introduction to Templates. The context: Notice that instead of just saying: