alastair at reid-consulting-uk.ltd.uk
Mon Aug 12 07:07:02 EDT 2002
> Under .NET each DLL has its own namespace, so the [lib] spec is
> needed to disambiguate. Since it's a namespace issue, I'd feel
> better if on .NET the name of the C function took a different form
> (perhaps <lib>.<function>) and [lib] is removed from the spec.
Isn't that just a different syntax for the same thing?
The thing I don't understand here is why .net issues affect the ccall
calling convention and not the dotnet calling convention?
I'm totally happy with defining dotnet to be ccall plus [lib] (or
lib.) specifications (much as stdcall is defined as a small delta on
ccall). I know what that means and it is implementable on platforms
which support dotnet. It is trying to make C fit into the .net scheme
of things which causes problems.
> BTW I didn't know the spec was in CVS somewhere... where exactly?
(and don't forget the grammar.sty file I pointed at in the commit message)
More information about the FFI