On Wednesday, 15 de December de 2010 11:37:51 John Layt wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 December 2010 19:53:50 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > I'm not sure we really already care about keeping BC on Windows.
> > Windows guys: do we ?
>
> Maybe not yet and we may be able to change stuff _now_, but once it kic
On Wednesday 15 December 2010 11:37:51 John Layt wrote:
> That was always my assumption. Which also makes me confused as to why
> promoting from private to public would break BIC, why should any change in a
> formerly private symbol break BIC when it is essentially deleting a private
> symbol and
On Tuesday 14 December 2010 19:53:50 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> I'm not sure we really already care about keeping BC on Windows.
> Windows guys: do we ?
Maybe not yet and we may be able to change stuff _now_, but once it kicks in
on Windows we don't want to have potential timebombs waiting to g
On Tuesday 14 December 2010 19:20:48 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 14, 2010, John Layt wrote:
> > Now, I've introduced some private functions in the 4.5. and 4.6 that may
>
> that's the problem right there, really: never, ever introduce private
> functions in public libraries. that'
Em Terça-feira, 14 de Dezembro de 2010, às 20:53:50, Alexander Neundorf
escreveu:
> A private function cannot be called by anybody outside the class, it can
> only be called from within the class, so private symbols should not make
> it into any user of the class, so removing private functions sho
On Tuesday 14 December 2010, John Layt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm been reading the BIC techbase pages again to make sure the api changes
> I've done in 4.6 won't cause problems.
>
> I had always thought it was BIC safe to 'promote' api to less restricted
> access levels, however I notice now that this do
On Tuesday, December 14, 2010, John Layt wrote:
> Now, I've introduced some private functions in the 4.5. and 4.6 that may
that's the problem right there, really: never, ever introduce private
functions in public libraries. that's what we have dptrs for: add them to the
private class and access
Hi,
I'm been reading the BIC techbase pages again to make sure the api changes
I've done in 4.6 won't cause problems.
I had always thought it was BIC safe to 'promote' api to less restricted
access levels, however I notice now that this doesn't work under Windows and
so is now considered BIC
