C23 is finished: Here is what is on the menu

Re:C23 is finished: Here is what is on the menu by jcelerier on Friday August 05, 2022 @05:57AM (#32353871)

> There isn't a technical reason why foo::x couldn't be the symbol name, literally.

how do you do when you want to access your C function from a language which is binary-compatible with C but uses :: for something else? [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]* identifiers are the only thing that the whole world more-or-less standardized around.

e.g. in fortran you can directly import a C function and call it. But "::" in the middle of a function name would very likely fail (I don't know enough fortran to tell for sure but given how the syntax looks...):

     subroutine foo (a, n) bind(c)
       import
       real(kind=c_double), dimension(*) :: a
       integer (kind=c_int), value :: n
     end subroutine foo

allows to call a "void foo(double *a, int n);" function defined in C. I imagine that

     subroutine ns::foo (a, n) bind(c)

would likely not work

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C23 is finished: Here is what is on the menu by zozbot234 on Friday August 05, 2022 @06:02AM (#32353922)

> how do you do when you want to access your C function from a language which is binary-compatible with C but uses :: for something else?

Typically you'd do this by picking a different internal name for the function, and putting the external symbol in quotes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C23 is finished: Here is what is on the menu by jstimpfle on Friday August 05, 2022 @06:10AM (#32353984)

Fair point. The C naming convention with flat names is quite conservative and consequently allows the names to be used directly from most other languages without any language-aware mapping / compatibility layer.

[ Parent | on HN ]