The thing I love about C that keeps me coming back to it is that it doesn't assume that I need to be coddled; It figures that if I malloc() that I will free().

I enjoy the power, even if with great power comes great repsonsibility. *ducks from all the bottles being thrown in his direction*

Anyways, any unresolved external symbol is just that. The compiler (actually the linker, which is usually seperate program (ld on gnu/*nix, not sure what's in Visual Studio anymore, LINK.EXE I think)) is saying "Hey, you're calling this function XXX but it's not in your code, nor is it any statically linked libraries that you've specified (-l with gcc/ld in a Makefile, Dependencies section under Linker in the project properties in Visua Studio IIRC.)

The other things that it's adding after the function name is something C++ does to support function overloading (so that each variant of the function has a unique name in the linker. Not really a big deal unless you're trying to dynamically look up and link to a C++ function. That's when you'd just tell it to link using C linking instead via extern "C".)

- Greg

Yeah, I eventually saw that I was missing my namespace from the function declaration, or something like that.

Here's my beef, really. The things that C++ makes me do (malloc/free, for example) are generally things that the computer can do as well, for some small processing cost. And by freeing me from doing that, I can worry about the higher level things that the computer cannot do as well.

No one codes in assembly anymore.

I'm not saying Java is the One True Answer(tm), btw. I'm just saying I hate that it doesn't bounds check my arrays. ;-)

Although I'm sure I could use boost instead of arrays, anyway.