[TUHS] why the leading under score added to function names?
imp at bsdimp.com
Tue Feb 21 12:50:00 AEST 2012
And this convention went away with ELF binaries. No more _foo for function foo.
Also, the fortran compiler would emit entry_ to as to not conflict either. Made calling C from Fortran, and vice versa, a lot of fun...
On Feb 20, 2012, at 5:34 PM, Brantley Coile wrote:
> correct. we could link to assembler code with _entry points and not worry about symbol collisions in the rest of the code.
> iPhone email
> On Feb 20, 2012, at 6:23 PM, "Dave Horsfall" <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012, arnold at skeeve.com wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure this dates back to PDP-11 days. I'm wondering "why?".
>>> Why did the C compiler prepend an underscore to function names?
>> Sure was the PDP-11 :-) I vaguely recall that it was to make sure that
>> user functions did not conflict with predefined assembler functions, as
>> that would be a pain to diagnose (much like having swap overlap root).
>> -- Dave
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
More information about the TUHS