On Monday, 20. June 2011 16:31:55 Xiaofan Chen wrote: > > The intention is to have > > /usr/(local/)/include/ftdi.h for 0.1 > > /usr/(local/)/include/libftdi-1.0/ftdi.h for 1.0 > > /usr/(local/)/include/libftdi-x.x/ftdi.h for x.x for later versions > > > > and have > > #include <ftdi.h> > > #include<libftdi-1.0/ftdi.h> > > #include<libftdi-x.x/ftdi.h> > > > > For the two latter cases, > > #include<libftdi-1.0/libftdi.h> > > #include<libftdi-x.x/libftdi.h> > > > > would also be fine, but i.m.h.o. bring no advantage. > > If 1.0 and 0.1 can not co-exist, I see no benefits of the > above. If this is to differentiate library version, then it > is actually much easier to have a new API called > libftdi_getversion() which return the version at runtime.
Having the two co-exist makes it much easier for distributions to ship both versions. Just think about what kind of mess it would be if libusb 0.x and libusb 1.x couldn't co-exist... I'm in favor of: /usr/include/ftdi.h <- libftdi 0.x /usr/include/libftdi-1.0/libftdi.h <- libftdi 1.x This helps people to catch errors with the include path much easier. Only cloud on the horizon: We might still stick to /usr/include/libftdi-1.0 for compatibility reasons, even when libftdi moved on to 2.x. Thomas -- libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details. To unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
