From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: accesibility level problem
Date: 1999/02/22
Date: 1999-02-22T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7aqd0i$tt5$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 36D06C0F.32CA8C6B@umundum.vol.at
In article <36D06C0F.32CA8C6B@umundum.vol.at>,
Thomas Handler <th@umundum.vol.at> wrote:
> This explanation makes accessibility rules even more
> clear for me.
The key point with accessibility rules is to remember that
they are designed to statically make dangling pointers
impossible, making worst case assumptions. If you have a
clear idea of the underlying stack implementation, then
this goal should be sufficient to understand the motivation
behind the accessibility rules (they are a little similar
to the "scope" rules in Algol-68 which had the same goal).
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-02-22 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-02-19 0:00 accesibility level problem Thomas Handler
1999-02-19 0:00 ` steve quinlan
1999-02-20 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-20 0:00 ` Steve Quinlan
1999-02-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-01 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Thomas Handler
1999-02-21 0:00 ` Thomas Handler
1999-02-21 0:00 ` Steve Quinlan
1999-02-22 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-22 0:00 ` robert_dewar [this message]
1999-02-22 0:00 ` Thomas Handler
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox