Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   (That doesn't mean you can't have a pointer pointing to a member of an
> > object, in a portable way. However, that requires either for the member
> > to be public or for the object to give you the pointer.)

> Actually, just thinking about it a bit more, if the class returns a pointer 
> to a member variable, and you can look in the header and see that pointer is 
> in an array, then you have a well-defined way of accessing the other private 
> data in the same array.

  Only if you also know which array element it's pointing to. (If you know,
then the class is, effectively, exposing the entire array.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message