🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May10.003304.12390@mathcs.sjsu.edu> horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann) writes:
>Just out of curiosity: Suppose I have a variable f that holds a pointer
>to a "C" style void->void function and I want to make f local to its source
>file, do I say
>
>   static extern "C" void (*f)();
>
>Cay

What you proposed is not syntacticly valid.
From reading the grammar, I get the feeling that the correct way to do this
is:

extern "C" {
  static void (*f)();
};

Since any declarations/definitions are gramaticly allowed inside an extern
construct.  The following may also be valid:

extern "C" static void (*f)();

I don't know whether current implementations support this (I have nothing
to test this on), but they should.  Another use for this flexibility might
be to provide a way to define resources for the Macintosh within the C++
source (i.e. extern "resource ICON,128" {....}).  Just a thought.
(Note: I am refering to AT&T 2.1, not ARM)

	-- Ben Schreiber
	   bs@cs.brandeis.edu