Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2023 21:05:15 +0000
Tried modules briefly when first added, but there was a build system compatibility issue .
Recently I've been using C++17 so, I need to revisit C++20 modules.
Thanks!
- James S.
------- Original Message -------
On Sunday, June 18th, 2023 at 4:08 PM, Edward Catmur <ecatmur_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 20:41, Smith, Jim via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Years ago I inquired about this, don't know if it was discussed further.
>>
>> In some cases we might want to limit access for some types declared in a namespace.
>>
>> Would it be feasible to at least add a private access specifier for Namespaces?
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> namespace Foo {
>> ...
>> private: {
>> func() {}
>> };
>> };
>>
>> Would make func() accessible only inside the namespace.
>
> What would that accomplish, given that any TU can reopen any namespace (pedantry: except std, etc) at any time?
>
> Have you looked at modules?
Recently I've been using C++17 so, I need to revisit C++20 modules.
Thanks!
- James S.
------- Original Message -------
On Sunday, June 18th, 2023 at 4:08 PM, Edward Catmur <ecatmur_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 20:41, Smith, Jim via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Years ago I inquired about this, don't know if it was discussed further.
>>
>> In some cases we might want to limit access for some types declared in a namespace.
>>
>> Would it be feasible to at least add a private access specifier for Namespaces?
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> namespace Foo {
>> ...
>> private: {
>> func() {}
>> };
>> };
>>
>> Would make func() accessible only inside the namespace.
>
> What would that accomplish, given that any TU can reopen any namespace (pedantry: except std, etc) at any time?
>
> Have you looked at modules?
Received on 2023-06-18 21:05:25