Hi Jeff,
On 2011-09-08 Jeff Hill wrote:
> Agree with Eric that it may very well be OS specific, and even OS version
> specific, whether the OS headers provide their own conditional blocks for
> C++ specifying extern "C", or not. It seems odd that it's that way for all
> OS. Could also simply have been a mistake, or a bad assumption at the time
> that it was written. I'm not sure what the standard says about nested
> extern "C" blocks?
I'm guessing it used to be necessary on some OS, and that osdSock.h file got
copied to the other OSs. I just committed the changes to delete these — I
tested it on many but not all so it's possible I might have broken something
which we can fix later if it comes up.
The problem with nesting extern "C" blocks is that the target has no way to
know if it's inside one, and even if you can say extern "C++" nobody does.
- Andrew
--
Optimization is the process of taking something that works and
replacing it with something that almost works, but costs less.
-- Roger Needham
- References:
- extern "C" { #include <...> } Andrew Johnson
- RE: extern "C" { #include <...> } Jeff Hill
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: 3.14 branch broken for older vxWorks Andrew Johnson
- Next:
[Merge] lp:~epics-core/epics-base/rebased-atomics into lp:epics-base noreply
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
RE: extern "C" { #include <...> } Jeff Hill
- Next:
RE: 3.14 branch broken for older vxWorks Jeff Hill
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|