Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="dragan, post: 3972878"] What about cross-platform interoperability? Write a struct here, read it there? I does indirectly. "C-linkage" (is that the right terminology?) is all that can be exported from DLLs ("sorry" to be so Windows-ish). I guess you probably could get all that name-mangled stuff to come out of a DLL on a single machine. You won't be selling that app to other people though, that's for sure. Are you being too hypothetical? I don't give it a second thought: I KNOW that I'll always be able to call "extern C" functions in a DLL (after LoadLibrary(), blah, blah.) I seem to have missed "the weakness". I'm sure there is one if you say so. Anyway, I feel like "extern C" and "layout" are separate. It's all good information though. YES! Thanks for letting me know I'm not "out of it" (a bit insecure maybe, "out of it", no way!). I didn't know that. Well maybe I sorta did because I rely on it ("extern C", "POD"). So there is a formality like the C++ ABI for Itanium for C? Interesting. Big kudos for C. But it is much easier in C to make a std ABI than in C++. C++ should have specified one from the beginning, but too late for that now. Live and learn. C/Std ABI: 1 point. C++/No Std ABI: -1 point. C++ is keeping C alive! And I know that too. I think in terms of the desktop/server space mostly as those are the applications I am building. I wasn't thinking "what pie piece of all computers", but rather "the desktop/server space is billions and billions of dollars of space" (with apologies to Carl Sagan). I would wager that a poll (eww.. not one of THOSE!) would show that most readers of this ng are in the client-server (includes all things web etc. too) space. That is, working on software that interacts with humans (rather than controlling anti-lock brakes, etc). (Or I am a fish out of water?). YOU said "today". The thread is all about C++0x. Indeed he did say that, but not with your "today" qualifier. I'm 99.9% sure that he is correct too. That's what he restated, but the thread was about C++0x, so you are sort of "preaching to the choir". I assume that too today: that I can write "convenience constructors" and not have a worry. I just don't do it because it's not official. Well, and again, the thread is specifically about C++0x. Did you miss that key aspect? Now THAT is an interesting tangent. I was thinking that C++0x features (at least a few stocking-stuffers) would be in my favorite compiler for Xmas! What do you mean by "concrete implementation"? Did you just mean one specific implementation? As opposed to worrying about all compilers or the majority or average of them across all platforms and domains? I just have some Windows apps to write. I understand that. Hopefully that "portable everywhere" hype doesn't keep "good people down". Which brings up another interesting (to me) tangent: that C++ doesn't compete with other languages as much as it is in competition with platform-specific/domain-specific solutions. I believe it. [/QUOTE]

Verification