[K42-discussion] [PATCH] These macros declare functions as both 'extern' and 'static'. This is strongly discouraged by the c++ spec and gcc 4 will not allow it. Instead, iso c++ suggests wrapping your extern functions in anonymous namespaces. See ISO-14882 7.3.1.1. Compiles correctly with both gcc 3 and gcc 4.1.

[Bryan S Rosenburg]

I don't have any particular objection to the namespace{} solution.  I wish 
namespaces had been available early in the K42 project.

However, in this case I don't think the problematic functions need to be 
either static or extern "C".  I'd probably keep the static attributes on 
general principles, and you have to keep the extern "C" attributes on the 
__k42_linux_##x declarations and on the __k42_linux_emulNoSupport 
declarations, because those routines really are external, but all the 
others are defined and used in the same file, so extern "C" linkage isn't 
needed.

- Bryan




Donour Sizemore <donour at cs.unm.edu> 
Sent by: k42-discussion-bounces+rosnbrg=us.ibm.com at ozlabs.org
10/02/2006 07:28 PM
Please respond to
Discussion about K42 <k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>


To
Discussion about K42 <k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>
cc

Subject
Re: [K42-discussion] [PATCH] These macros declare functions as both 
'extern' and 'static'. This is strongly discouraged by the c++ spec and 
gcc 4 will not allow it. Instead, iso c++ suggests wrapping your extern 
functions in anonymous namespaces. See ISO-14882 7.3.1.1. Compiles 
correctly with both gcc 3 and gcc 4.1.






If the commit mesg for this one is hard to read, here's it again.

[PATCH] These macros declare functions as both 'extern' and 'static'. 
This is strongly discouraged by the c++ spec and gcc 4 will not allow 
it. Instead, iso c++ suggests wrapping your extern functions in 
anonymous namespaces. See ISO-14882 7.3.1.1. Compiles correctly with 
both gcc 3 and gcc 4.1.

Thanks to Matthew Barrick for pointing out the correct solution to this 
one.

donour
_______________________________________________
K42-discussion mailing list
K42-discussion at ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/k42-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/k42-discussion/attachments/20061004/c5977a77/attachment.htm