Re: Objects
From: Andrey Tarasevich (andreytarasevich_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 11/06/03
- Next message: Andrey Tarasevich: "Re: String arrays"
- Previous message: Andrey Tarasevich: "Re: struct vs class"
- In reply to: jeffc: "Re: Objects"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Objects"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 11:20:31 -0800
jeffc wrote:
>> >> Is an object a class and a class an object?
>> >
>> > No. Some would say that an an object is a manifestation of a class.
>>
>> A class? In C/C++ terminology an object is a region of storage. Using
>> your words, it is a "manifestation" of _any_ type. It is not limited to
>> class types only.
>
> Now this is just semantics.
That's why I prepended my statement with "In C/C++ terminology...". I
should've probably said "In standard C/C++ terminology...".
> We could also call the built in data types
> classes of a sort. This really isn't the important issue.
The importance of this issue is pretty much equivalent to the importance
of the issue the OP is asking about.
-- Best regards, Andrey Tarasevich
- Next message: Andrey Tarasevich: "Re: String arrays"
- Previous message: Andrey Tarasevich: "Re: struct vs class"
- In reply to: jeffc: "Re: Objects"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Objects"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|