VC++ extension

Mark Hammond MarkH at ActiveState.com
Wed Aug 9 22:26:28 EDT 2000


"Courageous" <jkraska1 at san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3992013C.3AA0CA92 at san.rr.com...

> > > This is because the designers
> > > of C++, in Their Equally Infinite Wisdom (R), ah, well....
> > > nevermind. Trust me, they biffed it.

> > Sorry - I dont trust you.  Please explain, ensuring that you
> > take into consideration that a level of link-time type-safety
> > was a goal...  And also the fact that it is only an issue for
> > interfacing with C - if everyone got modern, there would be
> > no issue here, either <wink>

> The designers biffed it, because they failed to design link-level
> compatability. This is a manycolored problem; a symbol name
> mangling standard would have been a good first step.

Agreed - but this is a different issue - I can't see how you can
support overloading at link time while also maintaining compatibility
with C, even if there was a C++ standard.  Your complaint was with the
C compatibility, not C++ compiler interoperability.

Mark.





More information about the Python-list mailing list