Inside the WinAPI example for D, I noticed a lot of it's functions are 'tagged' as extern. Why is this? The functions clearly aren't extern.
The extern keyword specifies the linkage. WinMain must have external linkage so that it can be accessed from outside the module. It also specifies (in parentheses) the calling convention to use when calling a method. This is called the LinkageType. Detailed information can be found at Interfacing to C - D Programming Language.
it means the function should be called with the windows calling convention which is different from the D calling convention
WinMain gets called from outside D so it must be able to get called from there
Related
I had browsed internet, but hadn't found an answer.
Previously we used static linking using def file.
Currently this approach is not suitable, because there are cases when dll is not accessible.
So now we need to load dynamically function with unlimited function arguments.
Is there a common approach? Just push in right direction or some topic related for that is OK.
GetProcAddress does not care about the number of arguments the function has. If you use C++ and your problem is name mangling, you can either mark the functions with extern "C" or pass the mangled name to GetProcAddress.
When compiling fortran code into object files: how does the compiler determine the symbol names?
when I use the intrinsic function "getarg" the compiler converts it into a symbol called "_getarg#12"
I looked in the external libraries and found that the symbol name inside is called "_getarg#16" what is the significance of the "#[number]" at the end of "getarg" ?
_name#length is highly Windows-specific name mangling applied to the name of routines that obey the stdcall (or __stdcall by the name of the keyword used in C) calling convention, a variant of the Pascal calling convention. This is the calling convention used by all Win32 API functions and if you look at the export tables of DLLs like KERNEL32.DLL and USER32.DLL you'd see that all symbols are named like this.
The _...#length decoration gives the number of bytes occupied by the routine arguments. This is necessary since in the stdcall calling conventions it is the callee who cleans up the arguments from the stack and not the caller as is the case with the C calling convention. When the compiler generates a call to func with two 4-byte arguments, it puts a reference to _func#8 in the object code. If the real func happens to have different number or size of arguments, its decorated name would be something different, e.g. _func#12 and hence a link error would occur. This is very useful with dynamic libraries (DLLs). Imagine that a DLL was replaced with another version where func takes one additional argument. If it wasn't for the name mangling (the technical term for prepending _ and adding #length to the symbol name), the program would still call into func with the wrong arguments and then func would increment the stack pointer with more bytes than was the size of the passed argument list, thus breaking the caller. With name mangling in place the loader would not launch the executable at all since it would not be able to resolve the reference to _func#8.
In your case it looks like the external library is not really intended to be used with this compiler or you are missing some pragma or compiler option. The getarg intrinsic takes two arguments - one integer and one assumed-sized character array (string). Some compilers pass the character array size as an additional argument. With 32-bit code this would result in 2 pointers and 1 integer being passed, totalling in 12 bytes of arguments, hence the _getarg#12. The _getarg#16 could be, for example, 64-bit routine with strings being passed by some kind of descriptor.
As IanH reminded me in his comment, another reason for this naming discrepancy could be that you are calling getarg with fewer arguments than expected. Fortran has this peculiar feature of "prototypeless" routine calls - Fortran compilers can generate calls to routines without actually knowing their signature, unlike in C/C++ where an explicit signature has to be supplied in the form of a function prototype. This is possible since in Fortran all arguments are passed by reference and pointers are always the same size, no matter the actual type they point to. In this particular case the stdcall name mangling plays the role of a very crude argument checking mechanism. If it wasn't for the mangling (e.g. on Linux with GNU Fortran where such decorations are not employed or if the default calling convention was cdecl) one could call a routine with different number of arguments than expected and the linker would happily link the object code into an executable that would then most likely crash at run time.
This is totally implementation dependent. You did not say, which compiler do you use. The (nonstandard) intrinsic can exist in more versions for different integer or character kinds. There can also be more versions of the runtime libraries for more computer architectures (e.g. 32 bit and 64 bit).
I have been doing some x86 programming in Windows with NASM and I have run into some confusion. I am confused as to why I must do this:
extern _ExitProcess#4
Specifically I am confused about the '_' and the '#4'. I know that the '#4' is the size of the stack but why is it needed? When I looked in the kernel32.dll with a hex editor I only saw 'ExitProcess' not '_ExitProcess#4'.
I am also confused as to why C Functions do not need the underscore and the stack size such as this:
extern printf
Why don't C Functions need decorations?
My third question is "Is this the way I should be using these functions?" Right now I am linking with the actual dll files themselves.
I know that the '#4' is the size of the stack but why is it needed?
To enable the linker to report a fatal error if your compiler assumed the wrong calling convention for the function (this can happen if you forget to include header files in C and ignore all the compiler warnings or if a declaration doesn't exactly match the function in the shared library).
Why don't C Functions need decorations?
Functions that use the cdecl calling convention are decorated with a single leading (so it would actually be _printf).
The reason why no parameter size is encoded into the decorated name is that the caller is responsible for both setting up and tearing down the stack, so an argument count mismatch will not be fatal for the stack setup (though the calling function might still crash if it isn't given the right arguments, of course). It might even be possible that the argument count is variable, like in the case of printf.
When I looked in the kernel32.dll with a hex editor I only saw ExitProcess not _ExitProcess#4.
The mangled names are usually mapped to the actual exported names of the DLL using definition files (*.def), which then get compiled to *.lib import library files that can be used in your linker invocation. An example of such a definition file for kernel32.dll is this one. The following line defines the mapping for ExitProcess:
_ExitProcess#4 = ExitProcess
Is this the way I should be using these functions?
I don't know NASM very well, but the code I've seen so far usually specifies the decorated name, like in your example.
You can find more information on this excellent page about Win32 calling conventions.
I am wondering if extern "C" is a must or not?
Only if you want to call your code from C (or a different C++ compiler, which you should treat like C).
It is to disable name-mangling.
See this article on the C++ FAQ: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/mixing-c-and-cpp.html
No, you use extern "C" to provide a C-linkage to your C++ functions, so they won't be 'decorated' like normal C++ functions and to allow them to be called from C (or Objective-C).
Function decoration is used to implement the C++ function overloading feature and gives each variation of the function a different signature while allowing the developer to use the name he assigned.
Your C++ functions will be exported automatically by simply not using the static keyword. However if you have implemented your C++ functions within a Windows DLL it's necessary to use the declspec dllexport/dllimport keywords to access them externally.
Use of extern "C" switches off name mangling. If you don't do this you may make if hard for a client of your DLL to import your symbols.
Remember that different C++ compilers have different name mangling rules and so your mangled exported names may differ from the names used on import.
However, since it is wrong to import a class from a DLL if you are using a different compiler than that used for the DLL, this is rather a moot point.
So, if you are exporting classes (usually a bad idea anyway) it is easier to leave mangling on. Otherwise switch it off with extern "C".
What is the correct way to use GetProcAddress() on a 32 bit DLL? On win32, there are three calling conventions, cdecl, stdcall and fastcall. If the function in the DLL is foo they will decorate the name in the following ways _foo, _foo#N and #foo#N.
But if the author of the dll has used a .def file, then the exported name will be changed to just "foo" without any decoration.
This spells trouble for me because if I want to load foo from a dll that is using stdcall, should I use the decorated name:
void *h = LoadLibraryEx(L"foo.dll", NULL, 0);
GetProcAddres((HMODULE)h, L"_foo#16");
Or the undecorated one:
void *h = LoadLibraryEx(L"foo.dll", NULL, 0);
GetProcAddres((HMODULE)h, L"foo");
? Should I guess? I've looked at lots of 32 bit DLL files (stdcall and cdecl) and they all seem to export the undecorated name. But can you assume that is always the case?
There's really no shortcut or definitive rule here. You have to know the name of the function. The normal scenario is that you know at compile time the name of the function. In which case it does not matter whether the exported name is mangled, decorated, or indeed completely unrelated to the semantic name. Functions can be exported without names, by ordinal. Again, you need to know how the function was exported.
If you are presented with a header file for a library, and want to link to it with explicit linking (LoadLibrary/GetProcAddress) then you will need to find out the names of the function. Use a tool like dumpbin or Dependency Walker to do that.
Now, the other scenario which might lead to you asking the question is that you don't know the name at compile time. For instance, the name is provided by the user of your program in one way or another. Again, it is quite reasonable to require the user to know the exported name of the function.
Finally, you can parse the PE meta data for the executable file to enumerate its exported function. This will give you a list of exported function names, and exported function ordinals. This is what tools like dumpbin and Dependency Walker do.
If __declspec(dllexport) is used during compilation and __declspec(dllimport) in header file, as well as extern "c", then you do not need to decorate those functions. The __declspec helps in using the undecorated names, but function overloads, namespaces, and classes still require same way to distinguish them.
Usually, object oriented functions are exported using function ordinals instead of their decorated names. Cast the ordinal as (char*)(unsigned short)ordinal, thus, GetProcAddress(module, (char*)(unsigned short)ordinal);
Edit: while most of Windows use UTF-16, GetProcAddress uses UTF-8, so it cannot use a wide character string.
GetProcAddress(module, L"foo") is identical to GetProcAddress(module, "f");