Question

A “traditional” C++ class (just some random declarations) might resemble the following:

class Foo
{
public:
  Foo();
  explicit Foo(const std::string&);
  ~Foo();

  enum FooState
  {
    Idle, Busy, Unknown
  };

  FooState GetState() const;
  bool GetBar() const;
  void SetBaz(int);

private:
  struct FooPartialImpl;

  void HelperFunction1();
  void HelperFunction2();
  void HelperFunction3();

  FooPartialImpl* m_impl; // smart ptr
  FooState m_state;
  bool m_bar;
  int m_baz;
};

I always found this type of access level specification ugly and difficult to follow if the original programmer didn’t organize his “access regions” neatly.

---

Taking a look at the same snippet in a Java/C# style, we get:

class Foo
{
  public: Foo();
  public: explicit Foo(const std::string&);
  public: ~Foo();

  public: enum FooState
  {
    Idle, Busy, Unknown
  };

  public: FooState GetState() const;
  public: bool GetBar() const;
  public: void SetBaz(int);

  private: struct FooPartialImpl;

  private: void HelperFunction1();
  private: void HelperFunction2();
  private: void HelperFunction3();

  private: FooPartialImpl* m_impl; // smart ptr
  private: FooState m_state;
  private: bool m_bar;
  private: int m_baz;
};

In my opinion, this is much easier to read in a header because the access specifier is right next to the target, and not a bunch of lines away. I found this especially true when working with header-only template code that wasn’t separated into the usual “*.hpp/*.inl” pair. In that scenario, the size of the function implementations overpowered this small but important information.

---

My question is simple and stems from the fact that I’ve never seen anyone else actively do this in their C++ code.

Assuming that I don’t have a “Class View” capable IDE, are there any obvious drawbacks to using this level of verbosity?

Any other style recommendations are welcome!

Answer 1

“When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”

I, having spent a lot of time with Java, like the style of specifying access specifiers for every field and method separately. However when I am programming in C++, I always use the style shown in your first code snippet.