About the name mangling: this thing is compiler specific. To have really
portable code, whoever compiled the DLL should include flattened
procedural API model without name mangling. See the Kylix QT libraries:
borland have compiled their own version of Qt2.3.0 and have exported
things in a portable fashion. As things should be done.
Now, there is now way to extend an already compiled C++ class, so whoever
did the DLL MUST PROVIDE factory constructor and destructor. There is now
way to mix the construction and destruction of classes (C++ and Pascal
VMTs are different). So, a single member function cannot be exported
alone. You have to export all members of the entire class. Therefore, the
DLL creator should provide a flattened interface + constructor and
destructor wrappers. This may, or may not be done automatically by the
compiler. It is a matter of choice. Look here
http://andy.jgknet.de/oss/kylix/wiki/index.php/Qt3Clx for some enthisiasts
who apparently interfaced kylix with QT3 in some automatic fasion.
However, the DLL creator MUST RID THE EXPORT TABLE OF MANGLED NAMES.
Mangled names are just not portable: consider the idiots who maintain the
gcc standard libraries on linux. I have a lingering suspicion that these
morons itentionally make the binaries incompatible from version to
version. This way they force everybody to recompile their SOURCE CODE
against the new gcc libraries version. Moreover, they force
C++ programmers to use gcc, when compiling complex programs under linux.
This prevents people from the distribute and forget model of supplying
binaries. You simply have to maintain whatever program you compiled
against gcc. This is why you cannot write some nice variant of solitaire,
distribute and forget about it. The next major version of QT will break
it. So essentially, a fully portable API should treat the class instances
as "Handles" (e.g. win32, libborqt.so) and you use them as standard
functions. The code on the back side may or may not use classes, but the
front end is always transparent. So, unfortunately, the only thing you can
do is file a complaint with whoever is maintaining this Symbian API.
Peter
PS. If a library forces you to mix objects in different languages, it
simply is a badly written library.
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:18:11 -0600, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe the compiler could hide the
procedurization/re-object-orientation, thus making interfacing easier.
So this:
type
User = class
public
function Sum(a, b: cint): cint; cdecl; external 'cpplib.dll';
end;
Would be the exact equivalent of:
function User_Sum(Self: Pointer; a, b: cint): cint; cdecl; external
'cpplib.dll' name '_ZN4User3SumEii';
type
User = class
private
InternalHandle: Pointer;
public
function Sum(a, b: cint): cint; cdecl;
end;
function User.Sum(a, b: cint): cint;
begin
Result := User_Sum(InternalHandle, a, b);
end;
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
