Template wrapper link query

[PGK]

I'd like to wrap a series of "C" library functions using instantiated
templates. I'd also like to have this interface in a header file, but
not require the user to link to the "C" library.

In the example below, addInts and addChars are functions stored in a
"C" library. Running "c++ main.cpp addLib.o" is fine, but "c++
main.cpp" gives errors relating to the undefined references to addInts
and addChars.

As it stands, I have a clear error. Does anyone know if there's a
workaround?
Cheers,
Paul

// foo.h
extern "C" int addInts(int,int);
extern "C" char addChars(char,char);

template<typename T>
T myAdd(T a, T b) { return a + b; }
template<>
char myAdd(char a, char b) { return addChars(a,b); }
template<>
int myAdd(int a, int b) { return addInts(a,b); }

// main.cpp
#include "foo.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){ return 0;}

 

[Victor Bazarov]

I'd like to wrap a series of "C" library functions using instantiated
templates. I'd also like to have this interface in a header file, but
not require the user to link to the "C" library.

In the example below, addInts and addChars are functions stored in a
"C" library. Running "c++ main.cpp addLib.o" is fine, but "c++
main.cpp" gives errors relating to the undefined references to addInts
and addChars.

Well, in the program below they aren't defined. Where *are* they defined?

As it stands, I have a clear error. Does anyone know if there's a
workaround?
Cheers,
Paul

// foo.h
extern "C" int addInts(int,int);
extern "C" char addChars(char,char);

template<typename T>
T myAdd(T a, T b) { return a + b; }
template<>
char myAdd(char a, char b) { return addChars(a,b); }
template<>
int myAdd(int a, int b) { return addInts(a,b); }

// main.cpp
#include "foo.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){ return 0;}

V

 

[PGK]

I'd like to wrap a series of "C" library functions using instantiated
templates. I'd also like to have this interface in a header file, but
not require the user to link to the "C" library.

In the example below, addInts and addChars are functions stored in a
"C" library. Running "c++ main.cpp addLib.o" is fine, but "c++
main.cpp" gives errors relating to the undefined references to addInts
and addChars.

Well, in the program below they aren't defined.  Where *are* they defined?

As it stands, I have a clear error. Does anyone know if there's a
workaround?
Cheers,
Paul

// foo.h
extern "C" int  addInts(int,int);
extern "C" char addChars(char,char);

template<typename T>
T    myAdd(T a, T b) { return a + b; }
template<>
char myAdd(char a, char b) { return addChars(a,b); }
template<>
int myAdd(int a, int b)         { return addInts(a,b); }

// main.cpp
#include "foo.h"
int main(int argc, char *argv[]){ return 0;}

V

They are defined in addLib.o

 

[Victor Bazarov]

I'd like to wrap a series of "C" library functions using instantiated
templates. I'd also like to have this interface in a header file, but
not require the user to link to the "C" library.
In the example below, addInts and addChars are functions stored in a
"C" library. Running "c++ main.cpp addLib.o" is fine, but "c++
main.cpp" gives errors relating to the undefined references to addInts
and addChars.

Well, in the program below they aren't defined. Where *are* they defined?
[..]

They are defined in addLib.o

Uh... So, *if* the compiler/linker *knows* where they are (and it does
when you supply the name of the object module in the command line),
everything is OK, and if you *don't supply* the name of the object
module, you get the error... Hm... Tough choice. What should you
do?... Hm... Don't know what to tell you. Have you tried *not
omitting* the name of the object module from the command line? Oh, you
have, haven't you? And it worked. Aha...

What exactly do you want to hear/read? Isn't this like in the old joke,
"Doctor, if I remove the name of the .o file from the command line, I
get the link error. -- Well, don't do that!"

V

 

[PGK]

I thought there might be a way to short-circuit the call to
addChars/addInts etc. It seems a little redundant to fill a
function body with only "return addChars(a,b)".

 

[Victor Bazarov]

I thought there might be a way to short-circuit the call to
addChars/addInts etc. It seems a little redundant to fill a
function body with only "return addChars(a,b)".

It's fine, it's perfectly acceptable. Of course, it would probably be
better if you could do (disclaimer: not valid C++):

template<class T> T addThem(T a, T b) { return a+b; }

extern "C" char addChar(char a, char b); // from a library
template<> char addThem<char>(char a, char b) = addChar;

extern "C" int addInt(int a, int b); // from a library
template<> int addThem<int>(int a, int b) = addInt;

Hey, you can always suggest that in 'comp.std.c++' as a possible
improvement. You only need to figure out a justification. Right now
what you do should work in all cases, and compiler optimisation will
most likely replace the calls to 'addThem<char>' with 'addChar' since
the specialisation is inline for all practical purposes.

V

 

[PGK]

It's fine, it's perfectly acceptable.  Of course, it would probably be
better if you could do (disclaimer: not valid C++):

    template<class T> T addThem(T a, T b) { return a+b; }

    extern "C" char addChar(char a, char b); // from a library
    template<> char addThem<char>(char a, char b) = addChar;

    extern "C" int addInt(int a, int b); // from a library
    template<> int addThem<int>(int a, int b) = addInt;

Hey, you can always suggest that in 'comp.std.c++' as a possible
improvement.  You only need to figure out a justification.  Right now
what you do should work in all cases, and compiler optimisation will
most likely replace the calls to 'addThem<char>' with 'addChar' since
the specialisation is inline for all practical purposes.

V

I think they've got enough on their plates right now Thanks anyway.
Paul

 

[James Kanze]

PGK <[email protected]> kirjutas:

Microsoft Visual C++ has #pragma comment(linker, ...) which
can be used for linking in the needed libraries whenever the
library headers are included. This seems like a feature you
are looking for. However, this is an implementation-specific
extension and thus off-topic here. I don't know if other
compilers provide something similar.

I don't think they do, but I don't think that solves his
problem, either. All the pragma does is free the client from
having to specify the name of the library when linking. The
library still must be present on the system, somewhere where the
compiler knows to look (a directory specified by /LIBPATH, or
the %LIB% environment variable), and the library will still be
linked into the final executable.

 

[James Kanze]

We are guessing what exactly OP wanted. In my mind, to expect
to benefit from the library without actually using it is a bit
unrealistic,

But we often have posters asking to do unrealistic things. Just
because it is unrealistic doesn't mean that that's not what he
meant.

so I assumed that OP just wants to remove the burden of
explicit linking from the library users. And this wish is not
so improper; when I include library headers, then I definitely
want to link against that library, so why should I tell this
separately?

If the libraries are installed in a common directory there is
no problem.

If different libraries are installed in the same directory, you
have real problems in managing things. Directories are there
precisely to keep these things separate.

In our Windows build system this mechanism is used for tens of
projects with no problems.

How do you manage which libraries are present, and which aren't?
How do you remove a library, being sure that all files in the
library are removed, and no other files?

Classically, under Unix, the solution was simple: each library
was put in its own, separate directory, and "rm -r libraryRoot"
removed it completely, with no risk of removing anything else.
of course, this typically meant that you needed two path
commands in the command line, a -IlibraryRoot/include and a
-LlibraryRoot/lib, plus an additional -lrary to specify the
library, but in the end, the client programmer does have to know
(or should know) that he's using the library.