------- Comment #8 from jason at redhat dot com 2005-11-18 06:15 ------- Subject: Re: visibility attributes on namespace scope
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > What do you mean, "less or equal visibility to their enclosing scope?" Where default > protected > hidden > internal, if a class or namespace has a specified visibility, nested scopes should have the same visibility or something later in the above sequence. > My meta-goal is to try and give namespace and class scope visibilty attributes > similar meanings. Do you think this is worthwhile, possible, and do you think > this is a good idea? Yes, guess I should have said that before nitpicking the examples. > Yeah, maybe default namespace with hidden nested makes more sense for the > examples. However, wouldn't both have to be supported, anyway? Both would be supported by the simplest implementation, though we could enforce rules like the above if we wanted to. Mostly I was just puzzled that the examples in both PRs seemed inside out, and wondered if I was missing some compelling use case. Jason -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21764
