On Tuesday October 9 2012, Knoll Lars wrote: > On Oct 9, 2012, at 12:31 PM, Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday September 26 2012, Thiago Macieira wrote: > >> But note that there's one stricter requirement: the forwards > >> compatibility that applies within a patch series. Adding this new > >> virtual within the same patch series means a new, public symbol, which > >> could get used in applications. > > > > What about forward-compatibility if I'm changing a pure-virtual to a mere > > virtual function? AFAIU, pure virtual functions are actually backed by a > > function that prints "pure virtual called" and the aborts. So adding a > > (different) implementation should be ok, even in a patch release[1]? > > It would still break forward compatibility. Assume you do the change in > 5.0.1, and an app gets compiled against 5.0.1 using the new symbol (by not > reimplementing it in a derived class, or explicitly calling it). Your app > would crash when run against 5.0.0.
Ok, so a pure virtual doesn't create a symbol. Understood. Now, what's the forward-compatibility policy on the 4.8 branch? Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
