功能名称Mungling [英] Function Name Mungling

问题描述

在我看来，C不会混淆其功能名称会对C ++造成不必要的复杂性，在标题中无处不在C{...}。

我相信在ISO标准的下一个版本中，C应该转换为与b ++一致的功能名称，以改善

的互操作性。实际上这应该很久以前就已经发生了。


问候，

吉姆

解决方案

Jim Mackellan写道：

在我看来，C没有对其函数名称进行混淆，这对C ++造成了不必要的复杂化，在标题中到处要求extern''C''{...}。


我相信在下一版ISO标准中，C应该转移到

将其函数名称与C ++一致，以提高

的互操作性。实际上这应该很久以前就已经发生过了。

这就要求C ++使用一致的名称修改，这不是b
。


-

Ian Collins。

Jim Mackellan写道：
< blockquote class =post_quotes>
在我看来，C没有对其函数名称进行混淆会给C ++带来不必要的复杂性，要​​求在标题中无处不在C{...} 。

天哪，很大的复杂性。每个文件两个额外的行...

我相信在ISO标准的下一个版本中，C应该转移到

mungling函数名称与C ++一致，以改善

互操作性。这应该是很久以前发生的。

在此之前，C ++需要标准化

名称修改规则。它没有。


虽然我们在这里，你能否要求Fortran，Pascal和Assembler（所有芯片组的所有

变体）标准化他们的格式呢？


:-)

-

Mark McIntyre


CLC常见问题< http://c-faq.com/>

CLC自述文件：< http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome .txt>

On Sun，06 Jan 2008 01:02:59 +0100，Jim Mackellan写道：

我相信在ISO标准的下一个版本中，C应该转移到与b ++一致的功能名称，以改善

的互操作性。这应该是很久以前发生的。

没有必要。 C实现已经被允许并且能够以与C ++的特定

实现相同的方式实现
修改函数和对象名称，除了扩展为支持unprototyped

函数声明。如果他们不是，那不是因为C标准

不允许它，或者因为它在技术上是不可能的，它只是

因为没有足够的需求。

In my opinion, C not mungling its function names imposes unnecessary
complexity on C++, requiring extern ''C'' { ... } everywhere in headers.

I believe that in the next version of the ISO standard, C should move to
mungling its function names consistently with C++ to improve
interoperability. Acutally this should have happened long ago.

Regards,
Jim

解决方案

Jim Mackellan wrote:

In my opinion, C not mungling its function names imposes unnecessary
complexity on C++, requiring extern ''C'' { ... } everywhere in headers.

I believe that in the next version of the ISO standard, C should move to
mungling its function names consistently with C++ to improve
interoperability. Acutally this should have happened long ago.

Well that would require C++ to use consistent name mangling, which isn''t
the case.

--
Ian Collins.

Jim Mackellan wrote:

In my opinion, C not mungling its function names imposes unnecessary
complexity on C++, requiring extern ''C'' { ... } everywhere in headers.

Gosh, big complexity. two extra lines per file...

I believe that in the next version of the ISO standard, C should move to
mungling its function names consistently with C++ to improve
interoperability. Acutally this should have happened long ago.

Before that could happen, C++ would need to standardise the
name-mangling rules. It hasn''t.

While we''re at it, can you require Fortran, Pascal and Assembler (all
variants for all chipsets) to standardise their formats too?

:-)

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:02:59 +0100, Jim Mackellan wrote:

I believe that in the next version of the ISO standard, C should move to
mungling its function names consistently with C++ to improve
interoperability. Acutally this should have happened long ago.

There is no need. C implementations are already allowed to and capable of
mangling function and object names in the same way that a specific
implementation of C++ can do, except extended to support unprototyped
function declarations. If they don''t, it''s not because the C standard
doesn''t allow it, or because it''s technically impossible, it''s simply
because there''s not enough demand for it.

这篇关于功能名称Mungling的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！