Re: Derived private interface

[Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>]

On Aug 12, 6:43 am, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:

> >I see - but isn't it a special case?
>
> Yes, in today's world, safety and security are surely a special case --  
> hardly anyone seems to care, and thus they get PWNed all the time.
>
> Yes, of course there are ways to enforce safety and security in a dynamic
> loading environment,

Never in my posts I have mentioned dynamic loading of anything (in
fact, I have always stressed that the whole program can be compiled
and linked statically) and I think that your focus on safety and
security in this discussion is artificial. That is, I don't see in
what way OOP, applied in the way I have described, would compromise
either safety or security in this kind of systems.
Without this connection your "hardly anyone seems to care" is just a
strawman argument.
I think that everybody on this group cares about safety and security
(we would not be here otherwise), we just cannot agree on how to get
there while also preserving some other engineering values like
flexibility of design evolution or component integration.

> There is no one right answer to program design challenges

Right.

> -- only that no
> design at all is wrong!

This case was never proposed here.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com