Is there ever such a pattern of dependancies that it is impossible to keep everything in header files only? What if we enforced a rule of one class per header only?
For the purposes of this question, let’s ignore static things 🙂
Share
Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Is there ever such a pattern of dependancies that it is impossible to keep everything in header files only? What if we enforced a rule of one class per header only?
For the purposes of this question, let’s ignore static things 🙂
I am aware of no features in standard C++, excepting statics which you have already mentioned, which require a library to define a full translation unit (instead of only headers). However, it’s not recommended to do that, because when you do, you force all your clients to recompile their entire codebase whenever your library changes. If you’re using source files or a static library or a dynamic library form of distribution, your library can be changed/updated/modified without forcing everyone to recompile.