Carlo Wood 90f3e3b5d3 Do not include headers inside __BEGIN_DECLS ... __END_DECLS blocks.
We don't have C++ unsafe headers (anymore).

I added a test to fix_headers.sh that checks if certain "unsafe"
headers are ONLY included inside a __BEGIN_DECLS ... __END_DECLS
(because after all, they are unsafe), as well as checking that
no other header files are included inside such a block. The rationale
of the latter is that if a file is a C header and it declares
function prototypes (otherwise it doesn't matter) and is sometimes
included outside a __BEGIN_DECLS ... __END_DECLS block (from a C++
source file) then it has to be C++ safe and doesn't ever to be
included from inside such a block; while if a file is a C++ header
then obviously it should never be included from such a block.

fix_headers.sh subsequently found several safe headers to be
included from inside such a block, and those that were (apparently
in the past) unsafe were included only sometimes inside such a
block and often outside it. I had a look at those files and saw
that at least an attempt has been made to make them C++ safe,
but especially because they already are included OFTEN outside
a __BEGIN_DECLS ... __END_DECLS (from C++ source files) the
best decision seems to treat them as safe.

This is not risky: .c files that define such functions still
generate C-linkage for their functions. If a C++ unsafe C header
is included outside a __BEGIN_DECLS ... __END_DECLS block then
the only possible result would be an undefined reference to
a function with C++-linkage that will not exist. Aka, when
something links after this commit, then the commit was correct.
I did build all targets and they all linked.
2016-10-28 11:57:08 +02:00
..
2016-10-22 12:03:05 +02:00
2016-08-18 18:01:55 -04:00
2016-09-04 19:12:08 +02:00