Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>  (But then, presumably the module that 
> uses this thing will handle all creation and destruction.)

Well, yes, that's the idea. That's one way it's better than C++'s 
mechanism, which requires you to (for example) recompile every client if 
you change the layout of the private bits of the class.

> Also fun, you 
> how cannot have an array of this thing.

You can't have an array of pointers, or an array of the things? That 
seems odd if the former.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message