SV: [LC++]Is friend our friend?
netletter at comder.com
Mon Sep 3 19:10:34 UTC 2001
> I have got the impression, rightly or wrongly, that using the c++
> keyword "friend" is frowned upon as "not the object oriented way".
Maybe not, but then again, who wants to write pure OO. I mix C and C++
frequently and in my opinion it makes my code easier to read and maintain.
> My argument though, is that sometimes objects may share a _conceptual_
> relationship, even though they are not related via inheritance.
> There may be two objects that work together like a team. They
> rely on each other for full functionality to be achieved. As
> such they need each other's private information. The "friend"
> keyword allows this to be achieved.
And *I think* thats what the "friend" keyword is created for.
> Is there anything wrong with this argument? Are there good
> reasons why "friend" should be avoided? I have heard it said
None that I know off. Except it might be considered (by someone) bad coding
> What if you have two classes which naturally function as a
> team. Why not connect them via friend? What is the
> alternative design strategy which is supposedly better?
The alternative is to make all members "public", and thats _realy bad_.
No *I think* "friend" is your friend. It gives you _perfect_ control of who
"friend", "goto"... and others are not bad. And if you want to use them, use
them. Its only a question of _opinion_ and style, not a question of right or
More information about the tuxCPProgramming