> > People complain that (for instance) working on driver A can instigate core > tampering that hurts driver B. That's no longer possible - the core protect: and > private:s its implementation details now, so the compiler won't let you touch them. > > They're not as safe as you might think > > http://byuu.org/articles/programming/public_cast
Nobody is going to bother with the template crap in that article to 'defeat' C++ class access restrictions. And nobody ever claimed that C++'s class access restrictions were some magic way to prevent programmers from writing code to break them. There are a multitude of ways to 'work around' access restrictions, but every single one of them is clearly just that and wouldn't pass even the most lax code review.
So what R. Belmont says is true: it's not possible to bypass these class restrictions, not in the framework of code that would be accepted into the MAME source tree.
Previous 
Index 
Next 
Flat 
Re: C versus C++ with regard to MAME
Reply
