Re: C++: "unqualified" linkage

["Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>]

> I have one stylistic comment.  The name 'unqualified' doesn't seem to
> be very descriptive, as 'qualified' or 'unqualified' is an overloaded
> term in C++.  Nathan was suggesting 'C-global'.  What is wrong with
> that? 

I thought this not very descriptive, either. I feel that 'global'
things are those that can be qualified with '::', i.e. toplevel
names. The feature doesn't affect scoping at all; it only affects the
mangling. On the linker level, OTOH, all names are 'global'.

It's a matter of taste, and if people feel stronly one way or the
other, I can easily change it. I just wanted to throw-in another
option.

Regards.
Martin