This behavior seems to be specfic to newer versions of Clang, and is a language extension called "blocks".
The Wikipedia article on C "blocks" also provides information which supports this claim:
Blocks are a non-standard extension added by Apple Inc. to Clang's implementations of the C, C++, and Objective-C programming languages that uses a lambda expression-like syntax to create closures within these languages. Blocks are supported for programs developed for Mac OS X 10.6+ and iOS 4.0+, although third-party runtimes allow use on Mac OS X 10.5 and iOS 2.2+ and non-Apple systems.
Emphasis above is mine. On Clang's language extension page, under the "Block type" section, it gives a brief overview of what the Block type is:
Like function types, the Block type is a pair consisting of a result value type and a list of parameter types very similar to a function type. Blocks are intended to be used much like functions with the key distinction being that in addition to executable code they also contain various variable bindings to automatic (stack) or managed (heap) memory.
GCC also has something similar to blocks called lexically scoped nested functions. However, there are some key differences also note in the Wikipedia articles on C blocks:
Blocks bear a superficial resemblance to GCC's extension of C to support lexically scoped nested functions. However, GCC's nested functions, unlike blocks, must not be called after the containing scope has exited, as that would result in undefined behavior.
GCC-style nested functions also require dynamic creation of executable thunks when taking the address of the nested function. [...].
Emphasis above is mine.
Answer from Chris on Stack OverflowIt would not seem to hard to implement to allow a programmer to use a construct similar to:
int (*add)(int, int) = (int(int x, int y)){return x+y;};
This would simplify code that requires callback functions such as qsort or bsearch or various UI libraries that use callbacks to define, for example, a buttons behavior when pressed. Is there any specific reason they elected not to support this, and require us to define named static functions instead?
simple lambda like functions in C
How does the lambda expression work
Function composition in modern C++
Why does C not have lambdas/anonymous function expressions?
This behavior seems to be specfic to newer versions of Clang, and is a language extension called "blocks".
The Wikipedia article on C "blocks" also provides information which supports this claim:
Blocks are a non-standard extension added by Apple Inc. to Clang's implementations of the C, C++, and Objective-C programming languages that uses a lambda expression-like syntax to create closures within these languages. Blocks are supported for programs developed for Mac OS X 10.6+ and iOS 4.0+, although third-party runtimes allow use on Mac OS X 10.5 and iOS 2.2+ and non-Apple systems.
Emphasis above is mine. On Clang's language extension page, under the "Block type" section, it gives a brief overview of what the Block type is:
Like function types, the Block type is a pair consisting of a result value type and a list of parameter types very similar to a function type. Blocks are intended to be used much like functions with the key distinction being that in addition to executable code they also contain various variable bindings to automatic (stack) or managed (heap) memory.
GCC also has something similar to blocks called lexically scoped nested functions. However, there are some key differences also note in the Wikipedia articles on C blocks:
Blocks bear a superficial resemblance to GCC's extension of C to support lexically scoped nested functions. However, GCC's nested functions, unlike blocks, must not be called after the containing scope has exited, as that would result in undefined behavior.
GCC-style nested functions also require dynamic creation of executable thunks when taking the address of the nested function. [...].
Emphasis above is mine.
the C standard does not define lambdas at all but the implementations can add extensions.
Gcc also added an extension in order for the programming languages that support lambdas with static scope to be able to convert them easily toward C and compile closures directly.
Here is an example of extension of gcc that implements closures.
#include <stdio.h>
int(*mk_counter(int x))(void)
{
int inside(void) {
return ++x;
}
return inside;
}
int
main() {
int (*counter)(void)=mk_counter(1);
int x;
x=counter();
x=counter();
x=counter();
printf("%d\n", x);
return 0;
}
I was diving in reddit and I found the following post
I thought: maybe it is possible to do something similar in C with macros or something along those lines.
After some research, I found the following topic on GCC manual:
Statements and Declarations in Expressions
Well, with this construction, it's possible to instruct the compiler to define a function and call it in place, like we can do with lambdas. Look the example bellow:
#include <stdio.h>
int call_callback(void (*callback)()){
callback();
}
void foo() {
printf("foo\n");
}
int main(void) {
call_callback(foo);
call_callback(({
void _() {
printf("this is a lambda?\n");
}
(void (*)())_;
}));
}For me, it's very interesting. We encounter many situations and libraries that deal with callback functions, and personally, I often find myself declaring simple functions that are only called once. I believe that in these cases, this construct would work very well.
However, debugging it might be challenging.