Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 11:43:23 12/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 25, 2002 at 14:24:55, Matt Taylor wrote: >> >>What's the problem with 'extern "C"' ? > >That I forget to do it, that I don't want to have to do it. OK. Inability to use a tool shouldn't be blamed on the tool. >Aside from >namespaces, the only purpose name decoration serves is type checking. Obviously >disabling the decoration will disable type checking. > Eh. Yeah, exactly, that's the point. Type safety was _very_ important in the design and evolution of C++, and so was the ability to work with current linker technology, to be able to cooperate with other languages. Of course you lose type safety when specifying C linkage. That is exactly what it means, in fact. But since you don't have type safety in C in general, there is no loss. It's just an extra feature. It's like "you can interface with all sorts of languages if you want, but of course if the linkage required for that language isn't typesafe, it wont suddenly become so when used from C++". I really don't see this as a problem in practice. I very rarely interface with C or assembly language to any larger degree, and if I do, I will make a typesafe interface from C++ first. /David
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.