A programming question
-
Well, If you ever get to work at a company with thousands of developers (or as a program manager) you'll quickly understand the value. They are a very useful tool for controlling the application binary interface[^]. Let's say that you create an awesome library called DoSomethingAwesome.lib and everybody at your company wants to use DoSomethingAwesome. They take your lib as a dependency and quickly integrate it into dozens of projects. They derive classes from your headers and extend them and now it's DoSomethingMoreAwesome. Then your team changes some of the internals and DoSomethingAwesome is no longer compatible with DoSomethingMoreAwesome. In fact now dozens of other teams at the company are having to re-write parts of their code to accommodate for the changes in your lib. Paying software engineers is expensive and now this change has cost the company thousands of dollars. The concept of protected and private inheritance is a useful tool that allows the library development team to control the public interfaces and keep a stable ABI. It's just a tool in the toolbox. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
Thank you Very Much for this explanation! As I said before, I am in awe of your talents, and this is helpful for my understanding!
-
Thank you Very Much for this explanation! As I said before, I am in awe of your talents, and this is helpful for my understanding!
-
Disregarding the flagrant violation of protocol, and the total disregard of the red text at the top of the forum, those of you who have programmed in C++, have you ever used
protectedandprivateinheritance? I've never had a use for it, but have been extremely curious about when they are handy. They are not in C# (from what I've read), but maybe I've overlooked something, and they are useful in ways I don't know? Your thoughts and experiences, to expand an undeveloped understanding...Yes, they come very handy to define the degree of derivation freedom you want to let users for your interface elements. Why the question ?
-
Yes, they come very handy to define the degree of derivation freedom you want to let users for your interface elements. Why the question ?
Rage wrote:
Why the question ?
Because I have never seen good examples for
publicandprivatederivation. -
Well, I dunno man, when I read this headline the other day I was almost certain they were referring to software engineers. America is facing a monkey shortage[^] Best Wishes, -🐵🍌
The abbreviation is overused, but lol!
-
Rage wrote:
Why the question ?
Because I have never seen good examples for
publicandprivatederivation.Oh. I was hoping for a more crunchy story with secret services and hacking passwords.
-
Oh. I was hoping for a more crunchy story with secret services and hacking passwords.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I am a mere mortal programmer. :laugh: I don't have time to brute force passwords and such...
-
Sorry to disappoint you, but I am a mere mortal programmer. :laugh: I don't have time to brute force passwords and such...
That's because you do not use private and protected inheritance... :laugh:
-
That's because you do not use private and protected inheritance... :laugh:
+10! Made me laugh!
-
+10! Made me laugh!
(And also made me a bit sad, that we are overwriting the lives of other species to supposedly improve our own.)
-
Disregarding the flagrant violation of protocol, and the total disregard of the red text at the top of the forum, those of you who have programmed in C++, have you ever used
protectedandprivateinheritance? I've never had a use for it, but have been extremely curious about when they are handy. They are not in C# (from what I've read), but maybe I've overlooked something, and they are useful in ways I don't know? Your thoughts and experiences, to expand an undeveloped understanding...I have used private inheritance. The base class public access members are still public access in the derived class. Therefore the derived class still can call the base class functions and access its public data. But the user who instantiates the derived class, cannot access the public member of the base class, hence private inheritance. Public inheritance is a "is-a" relationship. Private inheritance is a "implemented-in-terms-of" relationship. A useful example, is I like .NET string class and like a C++ string class with the same C# methods but I do not want to reimplement from scratch, so I derived from
std::wstringwith private inheritance to make use of its functionality, so that user of my string class cannot access the base class'sstd::wstringto avoid the confusion.class MyString : private std::wstring
{
};There is an excellent blog about this topic: [C++ Tutorial: Private Inheritance - 2020](https://www.bogotobogo.com/cplusplus/private\_inheritance.php)
-
The abbreviation is overused, but lol!
(And also made me a bit sad, that we are overwriting the lives of other species to supposedly improve our own.)
-
I have used private inheritance. The base class public access members are still public access in the derived class. Therefore the derived class still can call the base class functions and access its public data. But the user who instantiates the derived class, cannot access the public member of the base class, hence private inheritance. Public inheritance is a "is-a" relationship. Private inheritance is a "implemented-in-terms-of" relationship. A useful example, is I like .NET string class and like a C++ string class with the same C# methods but I do not want to reimplement from scratch, so I derived from
std::wstringwith private inheritance to make use of its functionality, so that user of my string class cannot access the base class'sstd::wstringto avoid the confusion.class MyString : private std::wstring
{
};There is an excellent blog about this topic: [C++ Tutorial: Private Inheritance - 2020](https://www.bogotobogo.com/cplusplus/private\_inheritance.php)
Thank you. Very helpful!
-
Disregarding the flagrant violation of protocol, and the total disregard of the red text at the top of the forum, those of you who have programmed in C++, have you ever used
protectedandprivateinheritance? I've never had a use for it, but have been extremely curious about when they are handy. They are not in C# (from what I've read), but maybe I've overlooked something, and they are useful in ways I don't know? Your thoughts and experiences, to expand an undeveloped understanding...Hi David, According to this, private inheritance in C++17 is primarily used whenever you're having a need to make all those public and protected members, in a base class, to become private in all derived descendant classes, and, thus not accessible via a derived class object. Whist, according to this, all public and protected members of a base class become protected in all derived classes. This is typically needed to make those public members of a base class to become protected in all descendent classes, rather than those methods are accessible via a derived class object.
-
(And also made me a bit sad, that we are overwriting the lives of other species to supposedly improve our own.)
Yeah,
David O'Neil wrote:
we are overwriting the lives of other species to supposedly improve our own
One of my old coworkers has a wife that was working as a research scientist at the Tulane National Primate Research Center |[^] and she would describe some of her research. They have over 5,000 primates, you have absolutely no idea... what she was telling me was worse than anything you can possibly even imagine. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
-
Well, If you ever get to work at a company with thousands of developers (or as a program manager) you'll quickly understand the value. They are a very useful tool for controlling the application binary interface[^]. Let's say that you create an awesome library called DoSomethingAwesome.lib and everybody at your company wants to use DoSomethingAwesome. They take your lib as a dependency and quickly integrate it into dozens of projects. They derive classes from your headers and extend them and now it's DoSomethingMoreAwesome. Then your team changes some of the internals and DoSomethingAwesome is no longer compatible with DoSomethingMoreAwesome. In fact now dozens of other teams at the company are having to re-write parts of their code to accommodate for the changes in your lib. Paying software engineers is expensive and now this change has cost the company thousands of dollars. The concept of protected and private inheritance is a useful tool that allows the library development team to control the public interfaces and keep a stable ABI. It's just a tool in the toolbox. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
A good example, but most cases I've come across caring about these kind of problems use delegates instead of inheritance. Delegates come with the additional advantage to keep what would otherwise be the base class entirely out of the API (i. e. the headers). I. e. instead of putting this into your header:
class MyEncapsulatedBaseClass { // ...
public:
void doAwesomeStuff();
};
class MYAPI MyDerivedClass : private MyEncapsulatedBaseClass { // ...
public:
void doMoreAwsomeStuff(); // calls doAwesomeStuff() and more
};you only put this in your header:
class MYAPI MyClass {
class MyEncapsulatedClass* delegate;
public:
void doMoreAwesomeStuff(); // uses delegate to do awesome stuff and then does more
};The advantage of the latter is that you can switch to a different encapsulated class or change the function and data members in that class without affecting the API delivered to your clients. The only advantage of the former I can think of is, that with protected inheritance, that protection is not final, at least not for virtual member functions: another derived class can overide any protected virutal base function with a public one, making it accessible again! (Of course, if you want to retain that option, the question is why don't you use public inheritance to start with ? :wtf: )
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
A good example, but most cases I've come across caring about these kind of problems use delegates instead of inheritance. Delegates come with the additional advantage to keep what would otherwise be the base class entirely out of the API (i. e. the headers). I. e. instead of putting this into your header:
class MyEncapsulatedBaseClass { // ...
public:
void doAwesomeStuff();
};
class MYAPI MyDerivedClass : private MyEncapsulatedBaseClass { // ...
public:
void doMoreAwsomeStuff(); // calls doAwesomeStuff() and more
};you only put this in your header:
class MYAPI MyClass {
class MyEncapsulatedClass* delegate;
public:
void doMoreAwesomeStuff(); // uses delegate to do awesome stuff and then does more
};The advantage of the latter is that you can switch to a different encapsulated class or change the function and data members in that class without affecting the API delivered to your clients. The only advantage of the former I can think of is, that with protected inheritance, that protection is not final, at least not for virtual member functions: another derived class can overide any protected virutal base function with a public one, making it accessible again! (Of course, if you want to retain that option, the question is why don't you use public inheritance to start with ? :wtf: )
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
Yeah,
David O'Neil wrote:
we are overwriting the lives of other species to supposedly improve our own
One of my old coworkers has a wife that was working as a research scientist at the Tulane National Primate Research Center |[^] and she would describe some of her research. They have over 5,000 primates, you have absolutely no idea... what she was telling me was worse than anything you can possibly even imagine. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
All one needs to do is recall images of live monkeys with the tops of their skulls removed and numerous wires implanted. There's a reason that there are groups who are outraged by these practices are sometimes even provoked to mass-releases by attacking the labs. Those who condemn them - maybe if they had a look first, before the lab covered up the less PR-improving experiments. Not just monkeys - much of animal testing is irrelevant. If we relied on its outcome, we'd consider aspiring toxic (cats) and chocolate toxic (dogs) - we'd make up for it with amanita phalloides as a tasty addition to our diet since it doesn't harm rabbits. That's a mushroom more commonly called "The Death Angel".
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Disregarding the flagrant violation of protocol, and the total disregard of the red text at the top of the forum, those of you who have programmed in C++, have you ever used
protectedandprivateinheritance? I've never had a use for it, but have been extremely curious about when they are handy. They are not in C# (from what I've read), but maybe I've overlooked something, and they are useful in ways I don't know? Your thoughts and experiences, to expand an undeveloped understanding...One instance where I used private inheritance in pre C++ 11 days was to easily make a class non-copyable:
class fancy_type : private boost::noncopyable
{}; -
All one needs to do is recall images of live monkeys with the tops of their skulls removed and numerous wires implanted. There's a reason that there are groups who are outraged by these practices are sometimes even provoked to mass-releases by attacking the labs. Those who condemn them - maybe if they had a look first, before the lab covered up the less PR-improving experiments. Not just monkeys - much of animal testing is irrelevant. If we relied on its outcome, we'd consider aspiring toxic (cats) and chocolate toxic (dogs) - we'd make up for it with amanita phalloides as a tasty addition to our diet since it doesn't harm rabbits. That's a mushroom more commonly called "The Death Angel".
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote:
All one needs to do is recall images of live monkeys with the tops of their skulls removed and numerous wires implanted.
I don't know how you knew that, but she also told me that the experiments required that the primates were conscious to get accurate data. I don't know how she could sleep at night after doing something like that. It's disgusting. Best Wishes, -David Delaune