Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Julian Foad wrote:
>
>> If we revise the
>>function, we can't keep the same signature because although it will be
>>compatible one way ("backward-compatible") it won't be the other way.
[...]
>
> I don't understand the above. If we forbid users to allocate this struct,
> we can freely add fields in the future without problems. Or do you mean
> that we have a rule that if you compile with library x+1, and it links
> with lbirary x, it should work? Is that what you mean by "forward
> compatibility"?
Yes, that's what I meant.
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Feb 2 21:16:18 2006