Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!scea!greg_labrec@interactive.sony.com From: "Wayne K. Werner" Newsgroups: scea.yaroze.programming.codewarrior Subject: Re: Some concerns and ideas re CW Date: 13 Jul 1997 19:07:01 GMT Organization: SCEA Net Yaroze News Lines: 14 Message-ID: <01bc8fbf$f35cc500$a2bf43ce@wkwerner> References: <01bc8513$4e939960$9fbf43ce@wkwerner> <33b95c29.25784289@news.scea.sony.com> <01bc869b$d2a65420$6fbf43ce@wkwerner> <33c5903d.29746230@news.scea.sony.com> <01bc8e50$614263c0$87bf43ce@wkwerner> <33c908ae.79813459@news.scea.sony.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: port62.con2.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155 Jamin Frederick wrote > So does this mean there's *no* overhead when linking an object > library? How about class-static data? Or should this be avoided so > this doesn't have to be unecessarily piled onto the heap? I don't know the answer to that one, but even if static data members are included, it is probably not a problem. Separating classes into source code modules is a natural way of encapsulation. It seems to me that if you use a class, you need its static data. If you don't, it probably inhabits its own module, and you won't get what you don't need, even if you use classes in the same library. Wayne