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
Subject: Re: question about linker
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:02:24 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <vinh3h$7ppb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vi54e9$3ie0o$1@dont-email.me> <viaqh0$nm7q$1@dont-email.me>
 <877c8nt255.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <viasv4$nm7q$2@dont-email.me>
 <vibr1l$vvjf$1@dont-email.me> <vic73f$1205f$1@dont-email.me>
 <20241129142810.00007920@yahoo.com> <vicfra$13nl4$1@dont-email.me>
 <20241129161517.000010b8@yahoo.com> <vicque$15ium$2@dont-email.me>
 <vid110$16hte$1@dont-email.me> <87mshhsrr0.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vidd2a$18k9j$1@dont-email.me> <8734j9sj0f.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vidnp3$1ovvm$2@paganini.bofh.team> <vihpjh$2hgg1$1@dont-email.me>
 <vihrh1$2hk5l$1@dont-email.me> <vii0jp$2jkd9$1@dont-email.me>
 <viifv8$2opi7$1@dont-email.me> <vik28b$390eg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vik8tc$3ang9$1@dont-email.me> <vikjff$3dgvc$1@dont-email.me>
 <viku00$3gamg$1@dont-email.me> <vil0qc$3fqqa$3@dont-email.me>
 <vil82t$3ie9o$2@dont-email.me> <vila9j$3j4dg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vin4su$49a6$1@dont-email.me> <vin95m$5da6$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2024 19:02:29 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="96ede33273dc0a3b97f47f0da85205bf";
	logging-data="255787"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX184bdYU6vUpQhzzdsO77Djv2FDNRU6z5Ek="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:eS/6ZoDpCtriGAl/u7JrbmDoifc=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vin95m$5da6$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5617

On 03/12/2024 16:47, Bart wrote:
> On 03/12/2024 14:34, David Brown wrote:
>> On 02/12/2024 22:53, Bart wrote:
> 
>>> So, how would you have organised the 16-module example I posted 
>>> elsewhere? (Not a C project, these are 16 source files, so no headers 
>>> etc.)
>>>
>>> Because two posters here have suggested my organisation is poor, but 
>>> without knowing how big, small, or complex my projects are.
>>
>> No one (as far as I have noticed) have said that your organisation 
>> /is/ poor - they have said it /sounds/ poor from the way you describe 
>> it. The difference is very significant.
>>
>> For file organisation, I'd likely have all the modules in one 
>> directory unless there is a particular reason to split them up.  I 
>> would not have any non-project files in that directory.
>>
>> But the questions raised about your organisation was not a matter of 
>> where you store your files, or how they are divided in directories.  
>> It is about how you organise the code and split functionality between 
>> files (or directories, for bigger projects).
>>
>> What you have described is modules that have far too much in one file, 
>> modules with little or no structure as to where things are in the file, 
> 
> Because it doesn't really matter.

It really /does/ matter - regardless of what the language allows or does 
not allow.  If your language does not enforce ordering rules, that gives 
you more flexibility, but it does not relieve you of your responsibility 
as a programmer of writing code in a logical and structured manner.

> (My language allows out-of-order 
> everything. So all module-scope variables could go at the end of the 
> file, or file-scope variables at the end of the function! However I 
> don't do that.
> 
> But I really don't want to care about whether function F precedes G in 
> the file, or follows it. Any more than I would care whether a file "F" 
> is stored before or after file "G" in a directory! The ordering could be 
> sorted in different ways for display; perhaps an editor could do the 
> same. (I guess your IDE does that.)
> 
>> little to no structure or control over which modules use facilities 
>> from which other modules, and completely random inter-module 
>> dependencies which can happily be circular.
> 
> They can be circular when it makes sense. They are after all part of the 
> same program!
> 
> In C, if you have 100 modules, but modules 23 and 87 need to share some 
> variable or function, it can be visible to the other 98 too, or can 
> clash with the same name thaty 17 and 26 want to share. Or with a name 
> that module 72 forgot to make static.
> 

C has a risk of name clashes - that's why I am a fan of namespaces 
(proper ones, not your weird half-arsed solution).  But if only modules 
23 and 87 need access to the identifiers exported by module 42, then 
only those modules (and 42 itself) should include header 42.  Module 68 
will not include it, and can happily re-use the same identifiers as 
static identifiers or local variables.  And if the writer of module 72 
forgot to make a function static, ban them from the coffee machine until 
they have learned to use their tools correctly.

You don't get to say that because it is possible to have certain 
problems in large C programs, anarchy should reign - especially not when 
you are making your own language and can get it right!

> Or module 49 exports variable 'abc' as int, but 53 imports it as 
> 'char*', then fun and games follow. C has a lot worse problems!

That will be caught at link time, if not before - unless you have crappy 
tools or an ignorant programmer who doesn't know how to use them.