On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Lukas Renggli <renggli@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> It is interesting to note that of course, after this was added to 3.9,
>> there was
>>> someone *very hard* arguing that adding Pragmas was a very dumb idea...
>>>
>>> Who that person was is left as an exercise to the reader of course ;-)
>>
>> Hint: FFI has its own proprietary hardcoded pragma format. It
>> unnecessary complicates the compiler even when not loaded. Not to
>> mention that it breaks all tools that have their own parser, such as
>> RB for example.
>>
>
> And I hate having to write <apicall: � � �in windows and �<cdecl: �in Unix*
> I would love to be the same and that someone else takes care, not me (the
> user).
> Do you know if there is a reason for this? � I imagine that yes.

AFAIK apicall: uses the stdcall calling convention
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions#stdcall), while
cdecl: uses the cdecl calling convention
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions#cdecl).
So it depends on the function's calling convention which you should use
(and not the OS).


Thanks Levente. I noticed what you said. But it seems that a OS usually takes one of those conventions as default or at least most commonly used.
Would be cool to have the default implemented depending in the OS (no need to explicitly say it)� and if you don't want it (the default) just put what you want ?

Cheers

Mariano


Levente

>
>
>>
>> Lukas
>>
>> --
>> Lukas Renggli
>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project