On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> wrote: > The (bad) idea of using C++ namespaces was just targeted for those > integrating OpenSSL into their own C++ projects. > Now, I would have said that using C++ namespaces was a good idea and perhaps it might be motivation to replace the MACROs by something more useful,
> El 09/09/2014 20:39, "Larry Bugbee" <bug...@seanet.com> escribió: >> >> In the FWIW column.... >> >> Please don't mangle names by forcing C++ namespaces. Some us call OpenSSL >> from Python (and other dynamic languages) and depend on the C naming >> convention. Adding a "OSSL_" prefix is fine; mangling creates huge >> problems. >> I use a number of such languages and it isn't all that hard to mix them with C++ (in sme cases, I'd extend them using C++ code, for the sake of performance). In the case of Python, for example, there is a boost library designed specifically for that purpose. From my perspective, that is not a big problem. Rather, it is just one of countless things I routinely have to deal with: just the cost of getting things done. Cheers Ted -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
