appeal again: discard the syntax of private:, public: static:private{}, public{}, static{}.

[Andrei Khropov]

Mike Parker wrote:

> Boris Wang wrote:
> > the harm of these is more than the benefit.
> 
> I disagree. I like them and do not want to see them go away.
> 
> > 
> > all these syntax produce non-readable, non-maintainable codes, and even
> > more  in large project with many developers.
> That's why large teams have coding standards. If you are going to work on a
> large project and something is unreadable to you, make sure your coding
> standards prohibit it. You'll still have to deal with it when modifying third
> party code, but there's nothing you can do about it.
> 
> I find the syntax quite readable and have no trouble with it. So I strongly
> appeal that it not be removed.

I agree with you.
I always like C++ way of declaring members instead of Java/C# way because 
"public:" and "private:" sections visually separate interface and
implementation.
And if you want you can always establish coding standards for either option.


-- 
AKhropov