extern "C" and C++ files

[Gray Alien]

These are the "restrictions" I have come accross when "wrapping up" all
function declarations in a header with extern "C":

i). Inability to overload functions in exposed API
ii). Inability to include (template?) classes (e.g. string) in exposed API

Are there other ex/implicit restrictions I may have missed ?

 

[Alan Woodland]

These are the "restrictions" I have come accross when "wrapping up" all
function declarations in a header with extern "C":

i). Inability to overload functions in exposed API
ii). Inability to include (template?) classes (e.g. string) in exposed API

Are there other ex/implicit restrictions I may have missed ?

I'd guess bool wouldn't be portably usable too? and one would assume
references can't be exposed to a C compiler either?

Alan

 

[James Kanze]

I'd guess bool wouldn't be portably usable too? and one would assume
references can't be exposed to a C compiler either?

At the interface level, obviously, `extern "C"' doesn't make
much sense unless you stick to the common subset of C and C++.
(I would imagine that most, if not all, implementations, will
also make bool compatible with the C99 boolean type, and I can't
imagine an implementation where complex wasn't compatible with
it's C equivalents. But I don't think that the standards
guarantee this anywhere, and I'm not even sure how one would
formulate such guarantees.)