From 6251353480713727833 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,ea96cc047f6a22cc X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-15 09:30:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: comeau@panix.com (Greg Comeau) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: extern "C" -- what is the intent? Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:29:26 GMT Organization: Comeau Computing; http://www.comeaucomputing.com Approved: Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++ Message-ID: <9lckp7$bg5$1@panix3.panix.com> References: <090820010209154805%BobbySchmidt@mac.com> <9l8qvc$7ig$1@panix3.panix.com> Reply-To: comeau@comeaucomputing.com X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 997892979 mail2news:27413 mail2news mail2news.demon.co.uk X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!mulga.cs.mu.oz.au X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) Lines: 46 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:6993 In article , Hans Aberg wrote: >In article <9l8qvc$7ig$1@panix3.panix.com>, comeau@comeaucomputing.com wrote: >>A problem that I have with this is that to link to Language X can't >>actually mean to link to Language X because often Language X doesn't >>describe what linking to it actually means. > >Strictly speaking only if the language describes how it should be >converted into binary code, at least in the linking part. Which is why C++ doesn't strictly speak that. :) >> So it would seem >>wrong for Standard C++ to do so. I mean, how could it? >>(I think you may actually say so above, but I didn't get it.) > >The standard (in 7.5) already speaks about "linking to a language". Sure, but the implementations details are beyond the scope of the standard, and rightly so IMO. >It seems though that objects in a language have an interface which is used >when linking together with other objects. So linking to another language >would mean something like being compatible with that interface of the >objects of that language. Then this interface is created via language >constructs. So it seems that one should be able to create a definition of >some sort expressing this compatibility condition on the language level >(even though I am not sure what exactly this formulation should be). But, for instance, C doesn't define what its full interface is, so being able to say what it is from C++ doesn't follow. Even if there are languages for where this could be done, and I agree it could be done at least in part, it seems like it would be at the wrong level for a number of reasons. -- Greg Comeau Countdown to "export": December 1, 2001 Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout Tasty C99/C++ Combo: Dinkumware libs + Comeau Compilers == WOW!!! --- [ 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.research.att.com/~austern/csc/faq.html ]