Julian Foad wrote:
> This is a source-compatibility question.
>
> Wondering why my build was taking longer than it ought to, I noticed
> that we quite often include headers that we don't need. I have just
> committed r11887 which removes some from source files. I want to follow
> up with this patch to remove unused #includes from header files. If I
> do this, and a third-party client's source code relied on the fact that
> some of our headers unnecessarily include other headers, then his source
> code will not compile straight away after this change. I think we can
> agree that such code is broken, but, regardless of that, do we feel we
> need to provide source-level compatibility with such code? If so then I
> will patch only the private headers.
Regardless of the brokenness of code that relies on the current
namespace pollution in the headers, I don't think we can remove the
extra includes. People are relying on it now, and the proper time to
make such changes is along with the rest of our 'break backwards
compatability' changes in 2.0.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Nov 14 00:10:55 2004