On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:47:04PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > data. There's no reason the members shouldn't be implemented elsewhere, > and there's certainly existing code (in Windows, SymbianOS, and other > DLL-based operating systems, whether or not there is on GNU/Linux) that > implements different class members in different DLLs, while still not > exporting the class from its home DLL. One situation where this is > useful is when the class members are actually shared between multiple > classes, or are also callable as C functions, etc.
This doesn't make a lick of sense to me. If the type is hidden, how on earth can it get a member function _of that type_ from another library? That library would, by definition, have to have a type of the same name... but it would be a "different" type. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery
