From: Charles Krug <charles AT pentek DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Structures vs. Classes
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 09:34:40 -0500
Organization: Pentek Corporation
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <36E7D47F.9452268C@pentek.com>
References: <36E6768B DOT 6C91860E AT xyz DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.pentek.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Bjørn Hansen wrote:

> This is really a general C++ question but I don't read any other
> newsgoup So. . .
>
> Anyway is there any reason to use a structure instead of a class in C++?

If you're doing c++, and especially if you're like me and change from c to
c++ depending upon which day it is, you have to adjust your thinking from
"c-mode" to "c++-mode."

In c, a structure is a structure, you know it, you love it--it's familiar.

In c++, what we call a structure is REALLY a class whose members are public
be default.  It's a subtle change, true, but an important one.  For example,
the scope resolution operator, member functions all are valid things to do
with structures in c++.  I minimize confusion on my part (since I'm usually
the guy who has to fix things), by only using structures when I want them to
be EXACTLY the same as c structures--no member functions, only public data,
and use classes for everything else.

That works for me, buy YMMV.


Charles