Anonymous user
Talk:Break OO privacy: Difference between revisions
→Context?: Intentions (honourable).
(→Context?: Intentions (honourable).) |
|||
Line 38:
:::::::::: Why not? We have a variety of os-specific tasks and implementations here. (Most anything that deals with the command line, or with linking and often enough with i/o winds up being OS specific.) Anyways, by "scope" I was just referring to the task definition -- I was not talking about anything more formal than that. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 03:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
::::::: to find out which languages offer this possibility, in particular among languages that allow to inject code at runtime, is a very interesting question.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 12:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
This task was intended to exclude low-level "work out where the raw memory location is then peek/poke memory locations" type solutions. I really wanted something more "structured". See the examples that are already out there. If however the language compiler colluded with this approach by by making it easy to pick-out the memory location of the private member then ''maybe'' that might be worth mentioning, but that is in a grey area. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 06:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
| |||