Re: Type safety, C++ and code generation

On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:50:43 GMT, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:

brian.b.mcguinness@xxxxxxxx wrote:

One solution to the problem would be to provide a new keyword for
defining types with no default operations. Only the operations you
explicitly defined would be available.

You mean like "limited private"?

I don't think that would be a good idea.
Ada.Finalization.Limited_Controlled is a better way. The language offers an
abstract base type to derive from. No keywords needed.

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
.