From 6979865662192025964 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,fe953dde0d9fda91,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public Path: controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed.mathworks.com!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: llewelly.at@xmission.dot.com (llewelly) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: n1496 Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 21:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Organization: The Illusory Sorting Algorithm Lines: 47 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: <86vfiuq081.fsf@Zorthluthik.local.bar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1084828187 19036 10.0.0.1 (17 May 2004 21:09:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 21:09:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BPpMo-0004wt-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Mon, 17 May 2004 21:09:47 +0000 X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU with ESMTP id i4HL9itP009847; Tue, 18 May 2004 07:09:44 +1000 (EST) X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id i4HL9hB3009837; Tue, 18 May 2004 07:09:43 +1000 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 20:15:47 +0000 (UTC) X-User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (berkeley-unix) X-Cancel-Lock: sha1:QIgz2U2vWqGG4S3MUxf+DDlp1wE= X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: news@xmission.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.1 (built Wed Aug 20 09:38:54 PDT 2003) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-mulga_r1 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.2 required=5.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.60-mulga_r1 Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.std.c++:336 I'm unhappy with the bit in in n1496 about syntax. Specifically: # There are three possible approaches to specifying which names in # a translation unit refer to entities with shared linkage. First, # names with external linkage can be non-shared by default, and the # programmer would have to explicitly identify names that are to # have shared linkage. This is the model that Windows programmers # are familiar with. Second, names with external linkage can be # shared by default, and the programmer would have to explicitly # identify names that are not to have shared linkage. This is # similar to the model that UNIX programmers are familiar # with. Third, it can be implementation-defined which of the two # preceeding models applies. This minimizes the required changes to # existing code. I'm unhappy with the first model because it seems to break all existing unix code that makes use of shared libraries. I'm unhappy with the second model becuase it changes the default on windows; it seems to cause every declaration to undergo a silent change in meaning. I don't think either of the first two models should be accepted. I think I want all of: (a) A syntax for declaring a name to have shared linkage. (b) A syntax for declaring a name to have non-shared linkage. (c) If a name's declaration does not explicitly specify shared or non-shared linkage, whether that name's linkage is shared or non-shared shall be implementation-defined. The first time I read the third alternative, it seemed to mean this. On re-reading it, I'm unsure. Specifically, if an implementation supports shared libraries, I want both (a) and (b), regardless of the implementation-defined meaning of (c). --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]