On Sunday, 17 July 2016 at 01:30:31 UTC, Adam Sansier wrote:
I am trying to debug some really messed up code that makes no
sense. It calls in some code that doesn't seem to be using the
standard calling convention. The function definitions are
exactly the same in both D and C++.
->func(param1, param2, param3, param4);
The call stack setup by C++ before the call is
001fa18d 002aff3c 00000014 000000c0 002b10f8 00c7fa34 001f16cc
7f383000
The order is ret EIP, param1, param2, param3, param4, this
For D(naked asm)
00403ff3 002dc108 000000c0 00000014 002e73e8 026236f0 02ae4a78
0019fe54
The order is ret EIP, param4, param3, param2, param1,
as one can see, the order is reversed. The functions are
declared exactly the same in C++ and D(I just copied to D and
marked extern(C++). It is part of a method(It is COM but that
shouldn't matter?)).
Forget all that, What I'm really interested in is the exact
calling conventions used in D and C and C++ and what they mean
so I can make sure I know whats going on, cause something funky
is happening and it's not on my end(I'm not messing with the
order of this stuff directly).
So,
extern(C) = ?
extern(D) = ?
extern(C++) = ?
extern(Windows) = ?
C++ standard convention = ?
C standard convetion = ?
D standard convention = ?
Also, how is this pointer passed in method calls? ECX? Stack?
If Stack, first or last? Does it change with calling convention?
I'm looking for only the facts, hopefully from the man himself.
Is this a member function or global function that you're talking
about?
If you mean that you made a D class and then marked the function
extern(C++), I don't believe that is the correct way to do it.
You need to use an interface instead of a class in D, as
described here:
https://dlang.org/spec/cpp_interface.html
I'm not sure if it has been fixed at this point, but classes with
virtual destructors were not working for me last time I used this
stuff.
If it's a global function, then you could try changing it to
extern(C) instead, and your mark your C++ functions extern"C".
extern(C++) seemed to be giving me compiler-dependant
difficulties last time I tried it.
Bit
