[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Next stable release?
From: |
David Ayers |
Subject: |
Re: Next stable release? |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:47:34 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080509) |
Richard Frith-Macdonald schrieb:
>
> On 10 Jun 2008, at 15:28, David Ayers wrote:
>
>> Richard Frith-Macdonald schrieb:
>>
>>> Where we have methods which are GNUstep specific, they ought to be in
>>> If you have a better idea of how to go about this sort of thing I'm very
>>> willing to listen (even time consuming alternatives if you want to
>>> volunteer to help out). I just don't want inaction to perpetuate the
>>> situation where people complain about lack of Apple compatibility.
>>
>> Well I think the correct solution would be to use the version macros to
>> hide the declarations in the Foundation/*h headers yet to re-declare
>> them unconditionally in a corresponding GNUstepAdditions/*.h header.
>
> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you ... but if you do that, then all
> existing source code would fail to compile because declarations would
> not be visible in the headers they are including now, but they wouldnt
> be including the new header they need.
I thought that this commit ...
http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/gnustep/libs/base/trunk/Headers/Foundation/NSString.h?rev=26621&view=diff&r1=26621&r2=26620&p1=libs/base/trunk/Headers/Foundation/NSString.h&p2=/libs/base/trunk/Headers/Foundation/NSString.h
[http://tinyurl.com/3j3ysu]
... already breaks existing source code. But without providing an
alternative header to include. But in fact it seems that many of those
declarations already exist in GSCategories.h. Sorry I should have
checked earlier. [Yet there are some declarations that are not there...
not sure what should happen to them (maybe this is only true for
-immutableProxy]
So what I'm trying to say, is that we should insure that all those
methods are declared in GSCategories.h without the version macros. And
maybe add a comment in the Foundation files to indicate where these
declarations have moved to.
> I want current code to continue to compile and work with no changes, but
> to warn developers that things are going to change before the next
> stable release.
Well if someone is using version macros now, they'll notice that the
declarations are hidden. If not, I suppose they can't get warned with
the current infrastructure. They'll notice once the declarations are
removed from the file which should probably still contain a general
comment about where declarations have been moved to.
>> [I'm currently not sure whether GSCategories.h is currently includable
>> by applications using GNUstep proper.]
>
> It is, and it's where I would expect most method declarations to move to
> eventually
ACK. Sorry for the confusion.
Cheers,
David
- Re: Next stable release?, (continued)
- Re: Next stable release?, Fred Kiefer, 2008/06/06
- Re: Next stable release?, Fred Kiefer, 2008/06/07
- Re: Next stable release?, Adam Fedor, 2008/06/07
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/08
- Re: Next stable release?, David Ayers, 2008/06/08
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/08
- Re: Next stable release?, David Ayers, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?, David Ayers, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?,
David Ayers <=
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/10
- Re: Next stable release?, David Chisnall, 2008/06/08
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/08
- Re: Next stable release?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2008/06/09
- Re: Next stable release?, Adam Fedor, 2008/06/09