Is it possible to call a function in a C++ DLL from C code?
The function is not declared extern "C".
An ugly platform dependent hack that only works with Visual Studio is fine.
Calling conventions should not be a major issue, but how do I deal with name mangling.?
For instance with Visual Studio, a C++ function with signature void f() has the mangled name ?f##YAXXZ and that is not a legal C identifier.
(You don't need to tell me that I should declare the C++ function as extern "C".
I already know that. But I'm in a situation where I cannot change the C++ code.)
Wrap the offenging function in another C++ function, and declare it with extern "C". No need to create a special DLL for it, just include one C++ file in your project.
To make your compiler to statically link a function with a different exported name may be tricky. But you can always load the DLL with LoadLibrary and then use GetProcAddress.
You could investigate
LoadLibrary("path to dll");
to load the DLL and
GetProcAddress("?f##YAXXZ");
to grab a function pointer to the externally declared function.
I do not see any clean solution besides creating an additional dll written in C++ and exposing all interfaces via extern "C".
You could compile your C code using the same C++ compiler they used, then your C functions will be mangled using the same mechanism and everything will link seamlessly, and no-one will notice any difference.
If you must use a different compiler, then you'll have to manually load the dll using LoadLibrary and each function using GetProcAddress.
Related
I have compiled a library that I have created with MinGW into an existing application using Borland 6 (I know its old but that's what it was made with). I have used implib to create the .lib file and imported it into my project. I have also added the paths to the dll and necessary header files.
When I try to compile I get a pile of Unnresolved external type errors. Have I missed out any steps of the importing process? Assuming I haven't and the issue is something like name-mangling how do I go about writing the interface in such a way that name mangling won't matter. I know it involves extern C but thats about the limit of my knowledge. There are only two classes that need to be accessed from outside the dll the remainder are all only used internally. I'm not sure how to use extern C with something that is entirely built with classes. I'm stil hopeful that it's my importing with borland 6.
extern "C" cannot be used for classes, only for free functions. So you have an option of writing a "C" interface to your class, where each function takes a pointer to your class and you would probably have create and destroy functions.
This is a way it is typically done, and your class could be forwardly declared as struct, which is the same as class, and then could even be used by applications written in C. You would normally put extern "C" only when __cplusplus is defined so there are normally #ifdef guards around it.
There is another option, if you only want your class to be used by C++ and you don't want to have to write a C interface for all your class methods.
Users of the DLL use an abstract interface and still use Create and Destroy methods (with extern "C") to create a pointer to the abstract interface, but then use the pointer in the normal C++ way. Of course ideally you will wrap this pointer in a smart pointer, e.g. a boost shared_ptr with a custom deleter that calls the Destroy method. (Users of the library should do that but you can provide a headers-only interface to do it).
There are a few other issues you would need to beware of if doing this, e.g. anything to do with run-time type information is likely to not work on the user-side, including exceptions. And once again your library could provide "open-source" C++ wrappers (compiled on the client side) to handle this in a more C++ way. A sort-of pImpl.
The name mangling is not standardized across compilers. Only expose extern C functions so that they are not name mangled. But this has a limitation that you cannot use object orient programming.
Another option is to implement COM objects as they are binary compatible.
I'm trying to create a abstraction layer for platforms such as win32, mac os, linux, iOs etc.
I want this to be dynamically linked. On platforms that don't support this it shouldn't be a problem since from what I've seen everything that can be compiled as a dynamic library can be compiled as a static one as well with minimum impact on the code.
Now, to get to the point of this:
I created a interface named IThread and a class named CThread. I use a function named CreateThread that's defined with extern "C" to be able to export it and call it outside the library. The problem here is that in win32 for example there already is a function named CreateThread and thus I get a linker error. I understand the error and why it's appearing but I'm not sure of a good way to avoid this. I don't really like to use weird naming as qt uses like CreateQtThread.
Another idea I have would be is to create a thread manager/factory that creates instances of CThread but I'm not sure this would be a great idea.
What do you guys think about this? I'm asking because I don't want to rush on important organizing problems like this.
Thank you very much
I use a function named CreateThread that's defined with extern "C" to be able to export it and call it outside the library.
This is bad. I can't talk for other platforms, but on windows it's perfectly fine to export C++ functions. They are just get mangled, and you get some sanity checking in case someone changes the declaration. In fact, it's the only correct way to export a function that is C++. If you declare it as extern "C" you get no namespaces, no overloading, and someone who compiles with /EHsc will be in trouble if an exception escapes from your function.
Preferred solution: Do not declare them as extern "C", and put them in a namespace.
The only other solution: well, guess why all those C libraries prefix their functions with their_lib_prefix_function...
Your decision to use extern "C" is sound in my view because it allows access from other languages, compilers etc. But doing so means you can't use namespaces so you simply must prefix your functions with something to identify them as being from your library, a poor man's namespace if you will.
This is the compromise you must make if you want to use extern "C".
Well, I don't know whether you will like this as I know the C developers I worked with found it unaesthetic. But, it's very simple and prevents collisions like this. (More or less mentioned in this answer with the "their_lib_prefix_function" comment.)
So, whenever I was using C code, I used to basically 'namespace' my functions using an underscore. So, let's say your namespace is MegaAbstraction, then something like CreateThread becomes MegaAbstraction_CreateThread. Easy peasy. And no collisions, unless someone else has a namespace called MegaAbstraction in which case I recommend finding a namespace that's unlikely to be used by anyone else. ;)
Does your CreateThread use the stdcall calling convention (aka WINAPI)? If you use the cdecl calling convention, it should export the function name as _CreateThread and avoid the linkage conflict with the Win32 CreateThread function.
extern "C" _declspec(export) int _cdecl CreateThread(...
There is no "CreateQtThread" function in Qt, not even something similar. There's a QThread class, and it has constructors. If needed, you can put everything in a namespace.
I was trying to export a simple test function for a dll to work with an application (fyi: mIRC) that specifies the calling convention as:
int __stdcall test_func(HWND mWnd, HWND aWnd, char *data, char *parms, BOOL show, BOOL nopause)
Now, to call this from the application, I'd be using test_func but I have noticed due to name mangling it is not as simple as I'd thought.
Through similar topics here I have come to the understanding that using extern "C" in combination with __declspec(dllexport) is an equivelant (somewhat) method of removing mangling to module definitions (.def). However, when using the extern/dllexport method my function (as an example) is always _test_func#numbers whereas the .def removed all mangling as required for use with the application i needed to export to.
Could someone please explain why this is? I'm just curious about the two methods. Thanks!
extern "C" has nothing to do with stdcall: it only declares that C++ name mangling (aka type-safe linkage; inclusion of type information in symbol name) is disable. You need to use it independent of whether you use C calling convention or stdcall calling convention.
In stdcall calling convention, the callee removes the parameters from the stack. To make that safe, the exported name contains the number of bytes that the callee will remove from the stack.
If the application you are exporting to requires that no #number suffix is added to the name, it probably means that it expects C calling convention. So you should stop declaring the function as __stdcall. When you the declare it as declspec(dllexport), you should get an undecorated name in the DLL.
In the DEF file, you can call the function whatever you want; no additional checking is performed.
dllexport/import are designed to be loaded back by themselves, not an old C library using GetProcAddress. The mangling you have seen is what all Microsoft compilers have done for a long time for __stdcall functions. Most likely, your target either expects a __cdecl function, not __stdcall, but if not, you will need to use a .def file to specifically un-mangle the name.
I hope to LoadLibrary on an unmanaged C++ DLL with managed code, and then call GetProcAddress on extern functions which have been mangled. My question is are the mangled names you get from a C++ compiler deterministic? That is: Will the name always by converted to the same mangled name, if the original's signature hasn't changed?
It isn't specified by the standard, and has certainly changed between versions of the same compiler in my experience, though it has to be deterministic over some fixed set of circumstances, because otherwise there would be no way to link two separately compiled modules.
If you're using GetProcAddress, it would be far cleaner to export the functions as extern "C" so their names are not mangled.
It's compiler specific, as others have said. However, you can find details in a document by Agner Fog...
http://www.agner.org/optimize/#manuals
See item 5 on that page.
Also, these days, there are libraries which can handle mangling and demangling for common compilers for you. For Visual C++, the starting point would be the dbghelp and imagehlp libraries.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms679292%28v=VS.85%29.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms680321%28v=VS.85%29.aspx
Name mangeling is handled differently by every compiler (maybe or not-there is no standard). If you use pure C functions in your C++ code, you can use the extern "C" to supress name mangeling for the C functions so the compiler is able to find them.
I am just trying to further understand extern C functions.
According to my knowledge, an extern C function is always a function you are trying call from an application that has already been compiled. Either a executable, static or dynamic library.
extern "C"
{
HRESULT CreateDevice();
typedef HRESULT (*CREATEDEVICE)();
HRESULT ReleaseDevice();
typedef HRESULT (*RELEASEDEVICE)();
}
So my question is...
Is my understanding correct ??
Does it always have to be a C function pointer ??'
Why must you use a typedef for each function ??
I presume that when you use the GetProcAddress(). You are allocating memory on that particulars applications HEAP and not the one you are calling it from. Therefore you must release it from that heap as well ??
extern "C" has 2 implications. First, it declares that the symbolic names of the functions are not "name mangled" to support C++. Second, it tells the compiler that the function is called using the C calling convention rather than the PASCAL calling convention. The difference has to do with when the return address is pushed on the stack. Using the wrong calling convention will crash your app.
This declaration is for the compiler, not the linker. So the extern C function could exist in your own modules or in a binary library: the source of actual bytes for the function implementation are resolved by the linker. If the function signature is declared as a regular C++ function and not extern C, the compiler will mangle the symbolic name to encode type information from the function signature. This will make it incompatible with object code generated by other C++ compilers. Therefore creating an extern C function allows you to share code between compilers in binary form. Note that you can't expose member functions this way, only old-style C functions.
It doesn't have to be a function pointer. You can specify the function declaration normally and prefix it with extern "C", as shown in some Microsoft examples.
If you use GetProcAddress() you are not allocating any memory. You simply get the memory address of the function inside the DLL that has already been loaded into memory (with LoadLibrary(), presumably).
Even when using function pointers (such as those returned by GetProcAddress) you don't have to use typedef, it's just that the code looks pretty ugly without it. It's always hard to figure out what to write as well. I think it would be something like:
void (*pReleaseDevice)() = (void (__cdecl *)(void))GetProcAddress(hInstance, "ReleaseDevice");
extern "C" {} is a C++ convention to declare that the enclosed functions are C functions -- not C++ functions. C++ has a slightly different naming convention which conflicts with C. If you have a library written in C and want to use it in a C++ program, you have to use extern "C" {} to let the compiler know these are C functions. If the library was written in C++ I believe the extern "C" {} will cause an error.
Note that extern has multiple meanings -- this specific case is a C++ convention and is unrelated to different uses of extern. For example,
extern int count;
has a completely different meaning than extern "C" {}.
The typedef is separate from the extern "C" {} issue. typedefs let you create aliases for common types that make more sense. For example, declaring structs is often a verbose process. I can use a typedef to shorten it:
struct mystruct {int a; int b};
typedef struct mystruct returncode;
// I can now declare a variable as type 'returncode'
returncode a;
Thus, in your example the HRESULT is really an alias for (*CREATEDEVICE)() although I believe you have to put it before the function (and not after).
One important aspect of specifying extern "C" linkage is that the function names do not get mangled, which is the default for C++ names.
In order for your library's functions to be able to be loaded using GetProcAddress, you need to either add the function to the .def file, use __declspec(dllexport) or use extern "C".
To answer, in order:
extern "C" functions are used for interop with C from C++. Using them has the consequence that C code can call the function. As the windows API is a C API all functions are extern "C" to ensure that C and C++ code can make use of the API.
In order for c++ programs to interoperate with other languages, including C, as a convention , functions are exported using extern "C". Which is why a lot of dll code does this. It is not a technical requirement however.
So no, it does NOT have to be a C function pointer.
You don't have to use typedef's either.
The example code provided is from a header file that is publishing the exports of a DLL twice - Once as the set of extern "C" methods that are exported so that the dll can be statically linked. the other as a set of function pointer types, so that the dll can be dynamically loaded, and the function pointer types used with GetProcAddress.