Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Walk back ABI breaking changes #76

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 13, 2016
Merged

Walk back ABI breaking changes #76

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 13, 2016

Conversation

Keno
Copy link
Member

@Keno Keno commented Jul 12, 2016

No description provided.

stevengj
stevengj reviewed Jul 12, 2016
View reviewed changes
CMakeLists.txt
@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ disallow_intree_builds()
project (utf8proc C)

# Be sure to also update these in Makefile!
set(SO_MAJOR 3)
set(SO_MINOR 0)
set(SO_MAJOR 2)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hasn't the ABI technically changed because of #68?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suppose is has.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In particular, because of the changes to the utf8proc_property_struct data structure. Or do we not consider those fields part of the public API?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ABI compatibility is the question "if we drop the new library in where the old one used to be will things keep working" and because of those changes, I think the answer is no.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note that we changed the SO version in #24 because of the struct changes in #20.

But maybe we should stop considering the struct to be part of the ABI? Maybe we should stop exposing it in the header file.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are all the properties in the struct accessible via methods?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No.

@Keno Keno force-pushed the kf/revertabibreak branch from 095030f to 5072edc Compare July 12, 2016 17:40
@Keno Keno force-pushed the kf/revertabibreak branch from 5072edc to 5c41684 Compare July 12, 2016 17:40
@Keno
Copy link
Member Author

Keno commented Jul 12, 2016

Ok, I've removed the ABI de-bump, which can be a separate decision.

@stevengj stevengj merged commit c0a1ff8 into master Jul 13, 2016
@stevengj stevengj deleted the kf/revertabibreak branch July 13, 2016 14:41
@stevengj stevengj mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2016
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@Keno @stevengj