On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 13:41:40 Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Jarosch <thomas.jarosch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Thomas> On Thursday, 2. September 2010 20:58:59 you wrote:
> >> > The "ftdi_context" structure was expanded in libftdi-1.x, > IMHO
> >>
> >> this won't be ABI compatible.
> >>
> >> yes & no. i see the items were added to the end -- good. and the
> >> allocation is always handled by libftdi ? so users will not be
> >> doing malloc(struct ftdi_context) but rather ftdi_new() ?
>
> Wouldn't be the 1.0 release be a good point where we should make
> ftdi_context opaque to the users, disallow all direct access and force
> the user to do ftdi_new() ?
that would make sense to me. but the maintainers need to first indicate that
a stable ABI is desired ... not much point in doing this work when the ABI is
already breaking across minor releases.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
|
