MESSAGE
| DATE | 2011-06-05 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] (fwd) Re: Anonymous namespace
|
-- forwarded message --
Path: reader1.panix.com!panix!not-for-mail
From: Ruben Safir
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Anonymous namespace
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 05:05:59 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Lines: 28
Message-ID:
References:
<94rjavFbjiU7-at-mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: www2.mrbrklyn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1307163959 20952 96.57.23.82 (4 Jun 2011 05:05:59 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse-at-panix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 05:05:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Blackjet: Blackjet is a Yankee Fan
X-DRMisTHEFT: Use GNU Linux today
X-From: A Dark Cloud
X-LOCATION: Brooklyn NY - Forget abou' it!
X-NYLXS: Really - yah think computers are supposed to be broken?
User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies)
Xref: panix comp.lang.c++:1086004
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:12:15 +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>
>>
>> please expand?
>
> One way to look at the anonymous namespace is to consider it a namespace
> with a cryptic name. That name is only known within the current
> compilation unit. Thus anything declared within the namespace can't
> been seen elsewhere because the namespace name is unknown.
>
> So I could write
>
> namespace { int n; }
>
> and n would only be visible within the current compilation unit whereas
>
> int n;
>
> would be globally visible.
Ok - I'm getting a clearer picture. What specifically did you mean,
however, by the phrase "even if they should have external linkage"
This is why I wanted a job with a lot of smart C++ coders. I'd sweep the
floor if need be.
Ruben.
-- end of forwarded message --
|
|
