On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 13:41:40 Uwe Bonnes wrote: > >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Jarosch <[email protected]> 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.
