What exactly does putting extern "C"
into C++ code do?
For example:
extern "C" {
void foo();
}
1
16 Answers
extern "C"
makes a function-name in C++ have C linkage (compiler does not mangle the name) so that client C code can link to (use) your function using a C compatible header file that contains just the declaration of your function. Your function definition is contained in a binary format (that was compiled by your C++ compiler) that the client C linker will then link to using the C name.
Since C++ has overloading of function names and C does not, the C++ compiler cannot just use the function name as a unique id to link to, so it mangles the name by adding information about the arguments. A C compiler does not need to mangle the name since you can not overload function names in C. When you state that a function has extern "C"
linkage in C++, the C++ compiler does not add argument/parameter type information to the name used for linkage.
Just so you know, you can specify extern "C"
linkage to each individual declaration/definition explicitly or use a block to group a sequence of declarations/definitions to have a certain linkage:
extern "C" void foo(int);
extern "C"
{
void g(char);
int i;
}
If you care about the technicalities, they are listed in section 7.5 of the C++03 standard, here is a brief summary (with emphasis on extern "C"
):
extern "C"
is a linkage-specification- Every compiler is required to provide “C” linkage
- A linkage specification shall occur only in namespace scope
All function types, function names and variable names have a language linkageSee Richard’s Comment: Only function names and variable names with external linkage have a language linkage- Two function types with distinct language linkages are distinct types even if otherwise identical
- Linkage specs nest, inner one determines the final linkage
extern "C"
is ignored for class members- At most one function with a particular name can have “C” linkage (regardless of namespace)
See Richard’s comment:extern "C"
forces a function to have external linkage (cannot make it static)static
insideextern "C"
is valid; an entity so declared has internal linkage, and so does not have a language linkage- Linkage from C++ to objects defined in other languages and to objects defined in C++ from other languages is implementation-defined and language-dependent. Only where the object layout strategies of two language implementations are similar enough can such linkage be achieved
19
C compiler does not use mangling which c++’s does. So if you want call a c interface from a c++ program, you have to clearly declared that the c interface as “extern c”.
– Sam Liao@Faisal: do not try to link code built with different C++ compilers, even if the cross-references are all ‘extern “C”‘. There are often differences between the layouts of classes, or the mechanisms used to handle exceptions, or the mechanisms used to ensure variables are initialized before use, or other such differences, plus you might need two separate C++ run-time support libraries (one for each compiler).
‘extern “C” forces a function to have external linkage (cannot make it static)’ is incorrect. ‘static’ inside ‘extern “C”‘ is valid; an entity so declared has internal linkage, and so does not have a language linkage.
‘all function types, function names and variable names have a language linkage’ is also incorrect. Only function names and variable names with external linkage have a language linkage.
Note that
extern "C" { int i; }
is a definition. This may not be what you intended, next to the non-definition ofvoid g(char);
. To make it a non-definition, you would needextern "C" { extern int i; }
. On the other hand, the one-declaration syntax without braces does make the declaration a non-definition:extern "C" int i;
is the same asextern "C" { extern int i; }
Just wanted to add a bit of info, since I haven’t seen it posted yet.
You’ll very often see code in C headers like so:
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
#endif
// all of your legacy C code here
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
#endif
What this accomplishes is that it allows you to use that C header file with your C++ code, because the macro “__cplusplus” will be defined. But you can also still use it with your legacy C code, where the macro is NOT defined, so it won’t see the uniquely C++ construct.
Although, I have also seen C++ code such as:
extern "C" {
#include "legacy_C_header.h"
}
which I imagine accomplishes much the same thing.
Not sure which way is better, but I have seen both.
13
There is a distinct difference. In case of the former, if you compile this file with normal gcc compiler it will generate an object where the function name is not mangled. If you then link C and C++ objects with the linker it will NOT find the functions. You will need to include those “legacy header” files with the extern keyword as in your second code block.
@Anne: The C++ compiler will look for unmangled names also, because it saw
extern "C"
in the header). It works great, used this technique many times.@Anne: That’s not right, the first one is fine as well. It’s ignored by the C compiler, and has the same effect as the second in C++. The compiler couldn’t care less whether it encounters
extern "C"
before or after it includes the header. By the time it reaches the compiler, it’s just one long stream of preprocessed text anyway.@Anne, no, I think you’ve been affected by some other error in the source, because what you are describing is wrong. No version of
g++
got this wrong, for any target, at any time in the last 17 years at least. The whole point of the first example is that it doesn’t matter whether you use a C or C++ compiler, no name mangling will be done for the names in theextern "C"
block.“which one is better” – for sure, the first variant is better: It allows including the header directly, whithout any further requirements, both in C and C++ code. The second approach is a workaround for C headers the author forgot the C++ guards (no problem, though, if these are added afterwards, nested extern “C” declarations are accepteded…).
Decompile a g++
generated binary to see what is going on
main.cpp
void f() {}
void g();
extern "C" {
void ef() {}
void eg();
}
/* Prevent g and eg from being optimized away. */
void h() { g(); eg(); }
Compile and disassemble the generated ELF output:
g++ -c -std=c++11 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.o main.cpp
readelf -s main.o
The output contains:
8: 0000000000000000 7 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 1 _Z1fv
9: 0000000000000007 7 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 1 ef
10: 000000000000000e 17 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 1 _Z1hv
11: 0000000000000000 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL DEFAULT UND _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_
12: 0000000000000000 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL DEFAULT UND _Z1gv
13: 0000000000000000 0 NOTYPE GLOBAL DEFAULT UND eg
Interpretation
We see that:
ef
andeg
were stored in symbols with the same name as in the codethe other symbols were mangled. Let’s unmangle them:
$ c++filt _Z1fv f() $ c++filt _Z1hv h() $ c++filt _Z1gv g()
Conclusion: both of the following symbol types were not mangled:
- defined
- declared but undefined (
Ndx = UND
), to be provided at link or run time from another object file
So you will need extern "C"
both when calling:
- C from C++: tell
g++
to expect unmangled symbols produced bygcc
- C++ from C: tell
g++
to generate unmangled symbols forgcc
to use
Things that do not work in extern C
It becomes obvious that any C++ feature that requires name mangling will not work inside extern C
:
extern "C" {
// Overloading.
// error: declaration of C function ‘void f(int)’ conflicts with
void f();
void f(int i);
// Templates.
// error: template with C linkage
template <class C> void f(C i) { }
}
Minimal runnable C from C++ example
For the sake of completeness and for the newbs out there, see also: How to use C source files in a C++ project?
Calling C from C++ is pretty easy: each C function only has one possible non-mangled symbol, so no extra work is required.
main.cpp
#include <cassert>
#include "c.h"
int main() {
assert(f() == 1);
}
c.h
#ifndef C_H
#define C_H
/* This ifdef allows the header to be used from both C and C++
* because C does not know what this extern "C" thing is. */
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
#endif
int f();
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
#endif
#endif
c.c
#include "c.h"
int f(void) { return 1; }
Run:
g++ -c -o main.o -std=c++98 main.cpp
gcc -c -o c.o -std=c89 c.c
g++ -o main.out main.o c.o
./main.out
Without extern "C"
the link fails with:
main.cpp:6: undefined reference to `f()'
because g++
expects to find a mangled f
, which gcc
did not produce.
Minimal runnable C++ from C example
Calling C++ from C is a bit harder: we have to manually create non-mangled versions of each function we want to expose.
Here we illustrate how to expose C++ function overloads to C.
main.c
#include <assert.h>
#include "cpp.h"
int main(void) {
assert(f_int(1) == 2);
assert(f_float(1.0) == 3);
return 0;
}
cpp.h
#ifndef CPP_H
#define CPP_H
#ifdef __cplusplus
// C cannot see these overloaded prototypes, or else it would get confused.
int f(int i);
int f(float i);
extern "C" {
#endif
int f_int(int i);
int f_float(float i);
#ifdef __cplusplus
}
#endif
#endif
cpp.cpp
#include "cpp.h"
int f(int i) {
return i + 1;
}
int f(float i) {
return i + 2;
}
int f_int(int i) {
return f(i);
}
int f_float(float i) {
return f(i);
}
Run:
gcc -c -o main.o -std=c89 -Wextra main.c
g++ -c -o cpp.o -std=c++98 cpp.cpp
g++ -o main.out main.o cpp.o
./main.out
Without extern "C"
it fails with:
main.c:6: undefined reference to `f_int'
main.c:7: undefined reference to `f_float'
because g++
generated mangled symbols which gcc
cannot find.
Where is the extern "c"
when I include C headers from C++?
- C++ versions of C headers like
cstdio
might be relying on#pragma GCC system_header
which https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/System-Headers.html mentions: “On some targets, such as RS/6000 AIX, GCC implicitly surrounds all system headers with an ‘extern “C”‘ block when compiling as C++.”, but I didn’t fully confirm it. - POSIX headers like
/usr/include/unistd.h
are covered at: Do I need an extern “C” block to include standard POSIX C headers? via__BEGIN_DECLS
, reproduced on Ubuntu 20.04.__BEGIN_DECLS
is included via#include <features.h>
.
Tested in Ubuntu 18.04.
6
Best answer since you 1) explicitly mention that
extern "C" {
helps you call unmangled C functions from within C++ programs, as well as unmangled C++ functions from within C programs, which other answers don’t make so obvious, and 2) because you show distinct examples of each. Thanks!I’m wondering about C headers like unistd.h, sys/stat.h and sys.types.h. They don’t seem to put the “‘C'” after the “extern”. Using them from C++ code still seems to be unproblematic. Is the reason, that these are pure headers without an implementation file?
– Paul G.@Paul they seem to enable extern C with the macro
__BEGIN_DECLS
: stackoverflow.com/questions/8087438/… I observe what is mentioned in that answer on Ubuntu 20.04 for unistd.h. Forcstdio
however, it might be relying on the#pragma GCC system_header
: gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/System-Headers.htmlThanks! Weirdly that question didn’t show up when I searched and now id did when I searched for that specific Macro… I guess it’s good for it to be linked here. As __BEGIN_DECLS is defined in sys/cdefs.h but this isn’t included in either of unistd.h, sys/stat.h and sys/types.h, I guess sys/cdefs.h is just included by the preprocessor by default?
– Paul G.@Paul no worries, we all live and die by the wims of the Google God. It gets included via
#include <features.h>
.
In every C++ program, all non-static functions are represented in the binary file as symbols. These symbols are special text strings that uniquely identify a function in the program.
In C, the symbol name is the same as the function name. This is possible because in C no two non-static functions can have the same name.
Because C++ allows overloading and has many features that C does not — like classes, member functions, exception specifications – it is not possible to simply use the function name as the symbol name. To solve that, C++ uses so-called name mangling, which transforms the function name and all the necessary information (like the number and size of the arguments) into some weird-looking string processed only by the compiler and linker.
So if you specify a function to be extern C, the compiler doesn’t performs name mangling with it and it can be directly
accessed using its symbol name as the function name.
This comes handy while using dlsym()
and dlopen()
for calling such functions.
2
what do you mean by handy? is symbol name = function name would make symbol name passed to dlsym known, or other thing?
– Error@Error: yes. It’s essentially impossible in the general case to dlopen() a C++ shared library given only a header file and pick the right function to load. (On x86, there’s a published name-mangling specification in the form of the Itanium ABI that all x86 compilers I know of use to mangle C++ function names, but nothing in the language requires this.)
C++ mangles function names to create an object-oriented language from a procedural language
Most programming languages aren’t built on-top of existing programming languages. C++ is built on-top of C, and furthermore it’s an object-oriented programming language built from a procedural programming language, and for that reason there are C++ expressions like extern "C"
which provide backwards compatibility with C.
Let’s look at the following example:
#include <stdio.h>
// Two functions are defined with the same name
// but have different parameters
void printMe(int a) {
printf("int: %in", a);
}
void printMe(char a) {
printf("char: %cn", a);
}
int main() {
printMe('a');
printMe(1);
return 0;
}
A C compiler will not compile the above example, because the same function printMe
is defined twice (even though they have different parameters int a
vs char a
).
gcc -o printMe printMe.c && ./printMe;
1 error. PrintMe is defined more than once.
A C++ compiler will compile the above example. It does not care that printMe
is defined twice.
g++ -o printMe printMe.c && ./printMe;
This is because a C++ compiler implicitly renames (mangles) functions based on their parameters. In C, this feature was not supported. However, when C++ was built over C, the language was designed to be object-oriented, and needed to support the ability to create different classes with methods (functions) of the same name, and to override methods (method overriding) based on different parameters.
extern "C"
says “don’t mangle C function names”
However, imagine we have a legacy C file named “parent.c” that include
s function names from other legacy C files, “parent.h”, “child.h”, etc. If the legacy “parent.c” file is run through a C++ compiler, then the function names will be mangled, and they will no longer match the function names specified in “parent.h”, “child.h”, etc – so the function names in those external files would also need to be mangled. Mangling function names across a complex C program, those with lots of dependencies, can lead to broken code; so it might be convenient to provide a keyword which can tell the C++ compiler not to mangle a function name.
The extern "C"
keyword tells a C++ compiler not to mangle (rename) C function names.
For example:
extern "C" void printMe(int a);
1
can we don’t use of
extern "C"
if we have just adll
file? I mean if we have not a header file and just have a source file (just implementations) and use of its function via function pointer. in this state, we just used of functions (regardless of its name).
Not any C-header can be made compatible with C++ by merely wrapping in extern “C”. When identifiers in a C-header conflict with C++ keywords the C++ compiler will complain about this.
For example, I have seen the following code fail in a g++ :
extern "C" {
struct method {
int virtual;
};
}
Kinda makes sense, but is something to keep in mind when porting C-code to C++.
3
extern "C"
means to use C linkage, as described by other answers. It doesn’t mean to “compile the contents as C” or anything.int virtual;
is invalid in C++ and specifying different linkage doesn’t change that.– M.M… or mode generally, any code containing syntax error will not compile.
@ValentinHeinitz naturally, though using “virtual” as an identifier in C is not a syntax error. I just wanted to point that you cannot automatically use any C header in C++ by putting extern “C” around it.
It changes the linkage of a function in such a way that the function is callable from C. In practice that means that the function name is not mangled.
2
Mangled is the term generally used… Don’t believe I’ve ever seen ‘decorated’ used with this meaning.
Microsoft (at least partially) uses decorated rather than mangled in their documentation. they even name their tool to undecorate (aka un-mangle) a name
undname
.
It informs the C++ compiler to look up the names of those functions in a C-style when linking, because the names of functions compiled in C and C++ are different during the linking stage.
extern "C"
is meant to be recognized by a C++ compiler and to notify the compiler that the noted function is (or will be) compiled in C style, so that while linking, it links to the correct version of the function from C.
extern "C"
is a linkage specification which is used to call C functions in the Cpp source files. We can call C functions, write Variables, & include headers. Function is declared in extern entity & it is defined outside. Syntax is
Type 1:
extern "language" function-prototype
Type 2:
extern "language"
{
function-prototype
};
eg:
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
extern "C"
{
#include<stdio.h> // Include C Header
int n; // Declare a Variable
void func(int,int); // Declare a function (function prototype)
}
int main()
{
func(int a, int b); // Calling function . . .
return 0;
}
// Function definition . . .
void func(int m, int n)
{
//
//
}
I used ‘extern “C”‘ before for dll(dynamic link library) files to make etc. main() function “exportable” so it can be used later in another executable from dll.
Maybe an example of where I used to use it can be useful.
DLL
#include <string.h>
#include <windows.h>
using namespace std;
#define DLL extern "C" __declspec(dllexport)
//I defined DLL for dllexport function
DLL main ()
{
MessageBox(NULL,"Hi from DLL","DLL",MB_OK);
}
EXE
#include <string.h>
#include <windows.h>
using namespace std;
typedef LPVOID (WINAPI*Function)();//make a placeholder for function from dll
Function mainDLLFunc;//make a variable for function placeholder
int main()
{
char winDir[MAX_PATH];//will hold path of above dll
GetCurrentDirectory(sizeof(winDir),winDir);//dll is in same dir as exe
strcat(winDir,"\exmple.dll");//concentrate dll name with path
HINSTANCE DLL = LoadLibrary(winDir);//load example dll
if(DLL==NULL)
{
FreeLibrary((HMODULE)DLL);//if load fails exit
return 0;
}
mainDLLFunc=(Function)GetProcAddress((HMODULE)DLL, "main");
//defined variable is used to assign a function from dll
//GetProcAddress is used to locate function with pre defined extern name "DLL"
//and matcing function name
if(mainDLLFunc==NULL)
{
FreeLibrary((HMODULE)DLL);//if it fails exit
return 0;
}
mainDLLFunc();//run exported function
FreeLibrary((HMODULE)DLL);
}
11
Bogus.
extern "C"
and__declspec(dllexport)
are unrelated. The former controls symbol decoration, the latter is responsible for creating an export entry. You can export a symbol using C++ name decoration just as well. Besides completely missing the point of this question, there are other mistakes in the code sample as well. For one,main
exported from your DLL doesn’t declare a return value. Or calling convention, for that matter. When importing, you attribute a random calling convention (WINAPI
), and use the wrong symbol for 32-bit builds (should be_main
or[email protected]
). Sorry, -1.That only repeated, that you don’t know, what you are doing, but doing it this way appears to work for you, for some undisclosed list of target platforms. You didn’t address the issues I raised in my previous comment. This is still a down-vote, due to being wildly wrong (there’s more, that didn’t fit in a single comment).
Posting an answer on Stack Overflow kind of implies, that you know what you are doing. This is expected. As for your attempt “to prevent stack corruption on run”: Your function signature specifies a return value of type
void*
, but your implementation doesn’t return anything. That’ll fly really well…If you implement something, that appears to work, by pure luck, then you clearly do not know what you are doing (your “working” sample falls into that category). It’s undefined behavior, and appearing to work is a valid form of undefined behavior. It’s still undefined. I would highly appreciate it, if you exercised more diligence in the future. Part of that could be deleting this proposed answer.
You are reinterpreting a function that doesn’t return anything as a function that returns a pointer. It is pure luck, that x86 is very forgiving with respect to mismatching function signatures, and in particular return values of integral type. Your code works by coincidence only. If you disagree, you need to explain, why your code works reliably.
This answer is for the impatient/ have deadlines to meet to, only a part/simple explanation is below:
- in C++, you can have same name in class via overloading (for example, since they are all same name can’t be exported as-is from dll, etc.) solution to these problems is they are converted to different strings (called symbols), symbols accounts the name of function, also the arguments, so each of these functions even with same name, can be uniquely identified (also called, name mangling)
- in C, you don’t have overloading, the function name is unique (so, a separate string for identifying the a function name uniquely is not required, so symbol is function name itself)
So
in C++, with name mangling uniquely identities each function
in C, even without name mangling uniquely identities each function
To change the behaviour of C++, that is, to specify that name mangling should not happen for a particular function, you can use extern “C” before the function name, for whatever reason, like exporting a function with a specific name from a dll, for use by its clients.
Read other answers, for more detailed/more correct answers.
A function void f() compiled by a C compiler and a function with the same name void f() compiled by a C++ compiler are not the same function. If you wrote that function in C, and then you tried to call it from C++, then the linker would look for the C++ function and not find the C function.
extern “C” tells the C++ compiler that you have a function which was compiled by the C compiler. Once you tell it that it was compiled by the C compiler, the C++ compiler will know how to call it correctly.
It also allows the C++ compiler to compile a C++ function in such a way that the C compiler can call it. That function would officially be a C function, but since it is compiled by the C++ compiler, it can use all the C++ features and has all the C++ keywords.
1
The C++ compiler can compile an
extern "C"
function — and (subject to some constraints) it will be callable by code compiled by a C compiler.
When mixing C and C++ (i.e., a. calling C function from C++; and b. calling C++ function from C), the C++ name mangling causes linking problems. Technically speaking, this issue happens only when the callee functions have been already compiled into binary (most likely, a *.a library file) using the corresponding compiler.
So we need to use extern “C” to disable the name mangling in C++.
Without conflicting with other good answers, I will add a bit of my example.
What exactly C++ Compiler does: it mangles the names in the compilation process, hence we require telling the compiler to treat C
implementation specially.
When we are making C++ classes and adding extern "C"
, we’re telling our C++ compiler that we are using C calling convention.
Reason (we are calling C implementation from C++): either we want to call C function from C++ or calling C++ function from C (C++ classes … etc do not work in C).
1
Welcome to Stack Overflow. If you decide to answer an older question that has well established and correct answers, adding a new answer late in the day may not get you any credit. If you have some distinctive new information, or you’re convinced the other answers are all wrong, by all means add a new answer, but ‘yet another answer’ giving the same basic information a long time after the question was asked usually won’t earn you much credit. Frankly, I don’t think there’s anything new in this answer.
Refer to the link below which is Geeks for Geeks explanation for usages of extern “C”.
Adding important info from the page below.
Consider the following declarations of function f()
int f (void) { return 1; }
int f (int) { return 0; }
void g (void) { int i = f(), j = f(0); }
A C++ compiler may mangle the above names to the following (Source: Wiki)
int __f_v (void) { return 1; }
int __f_i (int) { return 0; }
void __g_v (void) { int i = __f_v(), j = __f_i(0); }
2
While the link might answer the question, the rules require answers to be self-sufficient, in case the link stops working. Can you add the main points from the link to your answer? See stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-answer
@HolyBlackCat, Will do the need full.
I’d like to introduce you this article: http://www.agner.org/optimize/calling_conventions.pdf It tells you much more about calling convention and the difference between compilers.