There were some discussions about adding namespace support with something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.

Then there's this small patch (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.

So what are the current plans?
Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We should really try to improve the situation.

On 1/8/2012 7:54 PM, Trass3r wrote:
> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with something like
> extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
>
> Then there's this small patch
> (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very
> interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.

Wanna do a pull request for it?

> So what are the current plans?
> Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We should
> really try to improve the situation.

I'm working as fast as I can :-)

How would this work exactly? Especially on Windows, libraries tend to not be compatible with each other. Will a C++ library be required to be compiled and linked with a certain toolset?

On 01/09/2012 03:16 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/8/2012 7:54 PM, Trass3r wrote:
>> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with
>> something like
>> extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
>>
>> Then there's this small patch
>> (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very
>> interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.
>
> Wanna do a pull request for it?
>
>> So what are the current plans?
>> Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We
>> should
>> really try to improve the situation.
>
> I'm working as fast as I can :-)

Le 09/01/2012 04:54, Trass3r a écrit :
> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with
> something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
>
> Then there's this small patch
> (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very
> interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.
>
> So what are the current plans?
> Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We
> should really try to improve the situation.

I was npot aware of this existing. This is awesome.

On 1/9/2012 1:25 AM, Zachary Lund wrote:
> How would this work exactly? Especially on Windows, libraries tend to not be
> compatible with each other. Will a C++ library be required to be compiled and
> linked with a certain toolset?

Yes, as it is already.

Am 09.01.2012, 04:54 Uhr, schrieb Trass3r <un@known.com>:

> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
>
> Then there's this small patch (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.
>
> So what are the current plans?
> Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We should really try to improve the situation.

IMHO this patch is rather flawed

 - Don't construct C++ classes as value types.
   You would need to know the exact size of the type
   and D can't preserve semantics for copy and assign.

 - D and C++ templates don't really map.

>> Then there's this small patch
>> (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4620) which allows very
>> interesting stuff, even simple templates. It's rotting.
>
> Wanna do a pull request for it?

Just wanted to point at it.
I'd like to have some discussion. See Martin Nowak's post for example.
In the end we need a consistent way to interface with C++.


>> So what are the current plans?
>> Not being able to access C++ libraries directly is a real blocker. We should
>> really try to improve the situation.
>
> I'm working as fast as I can :-)

I do believe that :)

> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.

Hmm another difficulty is how to switch between mangling schemes.

On 01/09/2012 06:36 AM, Trass3r wrote:
>> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with
>> something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
>
> Hmm another difficulty is how to switch between mangling schemes.

Given Walter's comment, I don't think they plan to.

On 2012-01-09 12:36:35 +0000, Trass3r <un@known.com> said:

>> There were some discussions about adding namespace support with  something like extern(C++, namespace) IIRC. Don't know the result though.
> 
> Hmm another difficulty is how to switch between mangling schemes.

One thing that could be done is instead of the namespace argument, have a mangled name argument. Then use CTFE to build the mangled name (if you want to).

This would also solve the problem we have on OS X where some C functions use a mangled name with a '$' in them thanks to the use of some GCC attribute in the system headers.

Or maybe it should be a pragma instead.

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/