you can access it using extern from anywhere:

    // a.c
    int f( int x ) {
        return x + 1;
    }

    // b.c
    extern int f(int x );

    int main() {
        int y = f(41);
    }

but if f() had been defined as static, you couldn't do this.

▲ bigfishrunning 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"private function" doesn't mean "you can't know about this", it means "you shouldn't rely on this as a stable interface to my code".

Just because you can use the information you have to call a given function, doesn't mean you aren't violating an interface.

▲

zabzonk 6 hours ago | parent [-]

my point was that f() had been defined static then you can't access it from outside the translation unit it is defined in - in other words, it is "private". i'm afraid i'm unclear what your point is.

	▲	Nevermark 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Both points are related and matter. For most purposes, not being able to access something, and being able to access something not officially in an interface, where doing so introduces an unpredictable breaking dependency, the practical result is the same: You can't (actually/sensibly) do it.

▲ jlarocco 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't see what you're getting at with respect to writing bindings.

The whole point of using "static" in that way is to prevent people from using it outside of the file.

If you need to call a static function (inline or otherwise) from outside of the compilation unit to use the API, then it's a bug in the API, not a problem with static.

I agree with you about pre-processor macros, though.

	▲	zabzonk 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		i think you replied to the wrong comment