On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:47:32 -0700, Walter Bright
<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2014 3:07 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
One downside of this proposal is that if we ever (perish the thought!)
attempted
to interface to C++ templates, this design would preclude that.
Yes, this seems to be a fatal flaw. Another design that has evolved from
these discussions and my discussions with Andrei on it:
extern (C++, namespace = A.B) { void foo(); void bar(); }
extern (C++, namespace = C) void foo();
bar(); // works
A.B.bar(); // works
foo(); // error: ambiguous
C.foo(); // works
alias C.foo foo;
foo(); // works, calling C.foo()
I really think the namespace semantics should be attached to the
extern(C++) rather than be a separate pragma. Having the namespace=
thing means that namespace isn't a keyword, and provides a general
mechanism where we can add language specific information as necessary.
This seems like a reasonable way to interop with C++ namespace in a D way.
I also think that it is something that we should do ASAP. I know that for
Aurora, I will not be able to add complete DirectX support until the C++
namespace interop problem is solved. Specifically because the highly
optimized DirectXMath functions are inside a namespace. I do not consider
pre-mangling a solution, it's a hack for something that is quite common in
C++, and it's fragile.
--
Adam Wilson
GitHub/IRC: LightBender
Aurora Project Coordinator
