Re: [Crash-utility] Extension modules in C++

----- Original Message ----- > Dne Čt 26. července 2012 14:02:56 Adrien Kunysz napsal(a): > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Petr Tesarik <ptesarik(a)suse.cz&gt; > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > as part of SUSE HackWeek8, David started work on a GUI extension using > > > Qt4, which is a C++ project. One of the early annoyances is that an > > > extension module must include the declarations from defs.h, and we > > > currently use some C identifiers which happen to be keywords in C++, > > > namely: > > > > > > - struct namespace > > > - struct namespace namespace (in struct symbol_table_data) > > > - char *typename (in struct gnu_request) And it seems that "namespace" is used for other purposes in files like ppc.c and ppc64.c...

The "typename" is changeable, in fact I don't think it's really used except for debugging purposes, although it would break the capability of using other (earlier) versions of gdb. I would say that most people use the most recent gdb version, but it always seems that there's somebody still doing things differently. But that could be dealt with by #ifdef'ing the structure member declaration in defs.h based upon the relevant GDB_X_X setting, because gdb/symtab.c wouldn't see it. Kind of ugly, though... > > > > > > Can I rename them? But you said earlier that the existing API must never > > > change... Any other suggestions to make this include file parseable by a > > > C++ compiler? > > > > One hack you could consider would be to do something like this: > > > > extern "C" { > > #define namespace ns > > #include "defs.h" > > #undef namespace > > } > > Yes! That works, although I'm not entirely sure it can't do any harm. > After all, it's what you called it - a hack. ;-) But it can't harm the crash utility, right? ;-) > I wonder whether Dave (Anderson) can suggest a cleaner solution (or make an > official statement that he doesn't care about C++ compatibility). > > Petr Tesarik > SUSE Linux To be honest, I really don't care about C++ compatibility -- with the realization that I'm already offending somebody. If Adrien's suggestion works, I suppose I'd prefer to keep things as they are. But if you really want to submit a patch, I'll entertain it as always... Dave