Re: Decorate C prototypes

[Martin Sebor <sebor at roguewave dot com>]

tom fogal wrote:
> Martin Sebor <sebor@roguewave.com> writes:
> > Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > [...]
> > > 2. We should verify that the compiler accepts
> > >
> > >   extern "C" void abort(void);
> > >   namespace std {
> > >     extern "C" void abort(void) throw();
> > >   }
> > >
> > > and:
> > >
> > >   namespace std {
> > >     extern "C" void abort(void) throw();
> > >   }
> > >   extern "C" void abort(void);
> > >
> > > That's important in case a user explicitly declares the function, or
> > > #include's the C header.
> > gcc 4.3.1 (the latest I have access to at the moment) does accept
> > this even though it's ill-formed according to [except.spec], p2:
> >
> >    If any declaration of a function has an exception-specification,
> >    all declarations, including the definition and an explicit
> >    specialization, of that function shall have an exception-
> >    specification with the same set of type-ids.
>
> Yes, but are those really the same functions?  It seems to me like one
> is `abort' and the other is `std::abort'.  Without any sort of using
> declaration, these are distinct ... no?

They are one and the same function. According to [dcl.link], p6:

    At most one function with a particular name can have C language
    linkage.

Martin

> -tom