See [GOTW #100](https://herbsutter.com/gotw/_100/) and [cppreference](http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/pimpl) for the trade-offs and additional implementation details associated with this idiom.
##### Enforcement
(Not enforceable) It is difficult to reliably identify where an interface forms part of an ABI.
@ -6851,7 +6899,7 @@ Since each implementation derived from its interface as well as its implementati
As mentioned, this is just one way to construct a dual hierarchy.
Another (related) technique for separating interface and implementation is [PIMPL](#???).
Another (related) technique for separating interface and implementation is [Pimpl](#Ri-pimpl).
##### Note
@ -15563,7 +15611,7 @@ through non-`const` pointers.
It is the job of the class to ensure such mutation is done only when it makes sense according to the semantics (invariants)
it offers to its users.
See also [PIMPL](#???).
See also [Pimpl](#Ri-pimpl).
##### Enforcement
@ -17354,7 +17402,7 @@ The `Link` and `List` classes do nothing but type manipulation.
Instead of using a separate "base" type, another common technique is to specialize for `void` or `void*` and have the general template for `T` be just the safely-encapsulated casts to and from the core `void` implementation.
**Alternative**: Use a [PIMPL](#???) implementation.
**Alternative**: Use a [Pimpl](#Ri-pimpl) implementation.