Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Threads across programming languages
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 11:18:06 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <v12a4e$f4f1$2@dont-email.me>
References: <GIL-20240429161553@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <v0ogum$1rc5n$1@dont-email.me> <v0ovvl$1ur12$4@dont-email.me>
 <v0p06i$1uq6q$5@dont-email.me>
 <v0shti$2vrco$2@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0spsh$31ds4$3@dont-email.me>
 <v0stic$325kv$3@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0svtn$32o8h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0t091$32qj6$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0u90h$3c1r5$4@dont-email.me>
 <v0v28q$3ku1r$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v105sc$3skqi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v10adm$3to7r$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v124a6$drbu$1@dont-email.me>
 <v125f4$e2kl$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 03 May 2024 11:18:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="77e40aae3b22ade63afb79718be155c6";
	logging-data="496097"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+EAqHxC82Td3kjevUkGbvD1/MnpjHCbAA="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pwhsaPRGUpvMcCUavzJzfMfmcrw=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v125f4$e2kl$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
Bytes: 2844

On 03/05/2024 09:58, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 03.05.2024 um 09:38 schrieb David Brown:
> 
>> No it is not.  C-style functions (or C++ functions for that matter) 
>> are not objects, and do not have calling operators.  Built-in 
>> operators do not belong to a type, in the way that class operators do.
> 
> You can assign a C-style function pointer to an auto function-object.

A C-style function /pointer/ is an object.  A C-style /function/ is not. 
  Do you understand the difference?

> That these function objects all have the same type doesn't metter.
> 
>> You missed the point entirely.  Lambdas can be used in many ways like 
>> functions, and it is possible for one function (or lambda) to return a 
>> different function, and can be used for higher-order functions 
>> (functions that have functions as parameters or return types).  They 
>> do not mean that C++ can treat functions as first-class objects, but 
>> they /do/ mean that you can get many of the effects you might want if 
>> C++ functions really were first-class objects.
> 
> C-style functions and lambda-types are generically interchangeable.
>