Subject: Re: Why no standard foreign language interface?
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 2000/02/14
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* William Deakin <>
| Ouch.  For two reasons really.  First the inherent evil in c++ library
| naming.  It needs 'putting to the sword.'

  I'm operating under the assumption that the name mangling thing is known
  to the compiler, and that `extern "C"' means the functions can refer to
  internal functions with mangled names, but export un-mangled names, that
  mere mortals can predict.  the wrapper functions around "native" C++
  functions can also do away with the braindamaged passing of pointers to
  structuresd classes, and use real argument lists.  at least half of the
  problem with interfacing to C++ is having to deal with the incredible
  propensity of C++ programmers to make function calls "efficient" by using
  pointers and references and whatnot in a very chaotic way.  such is what
  happens to people when they don't have lambda lists and multiple return
  values, but there's no reason to try to map such pain into the Common
  Lisp world.