I was trying out the validity of private access specifier in C++. Here goes:
Interface:
// class_A.h
class A
{
public:
void printX();
private:
void actualPrintX();
int x;
};
Implementation:
// class_A.cpp
void A::printX()
{
actualPrintX();
}
void A::actualPrintX()
{
std::cout << x:
}
I built this in to a static library (.a/.lib). We now have a class_A.h and classA.a (or classA.lib) pair. I edited class_A.h and removed the private: from it.
Now in another classTester.cpp:
#include "class_A.h" // the newly edited header
int main()
{
A a;
a.x = 12; // both G++ and VC++ allowed this!
a.printX(); // allowed, as expected
a.actualPrintX(); // allowed by G++, VC++ gave a unresolved linker error
return 0;
}
I know that after tampering a library’s header all bets are off (I mean, system integrity, etc.) Albeit the method being hacky, is this really allowed? Is there a way to block this? Or am I doing something wrong here?
privateis not a security mechanism. It’s a way of communicating intents and hiding information that other parts of your program do not need to know about, thus reducing overall complexity.Having two different header files is not standards compliant, so technically you’re entering undefined behaviour territory, but practically, as you’ve found, most compilers won’t care.