Indeed, Also, the trap should catch the hardfp instructions on devices where missing. /Mats
-----Original Message----- From: meego-dev-boun...@meego.com [mailto:meego-dev-boun...@meego.com] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira Sent: den 25 oktober 2010 23:53 To: meego-dev@meego.com Subject: Re: [MeeGo-dev] ARMv7 hardfp port of MeeGo discussion (Was: Re: new draft of MeeGo compliance specification) On Monday, 25 de October de 2010 17:35:48 Arjan van de Ven wrote: > this is me, one of the MeeGo architects, opposing breaking the MeeGo > API this lightly. > MeeGo's value proposition is about giving a consistent platform to > ISVs; and this proposal completely destroys that in image, if not > reality. > > In part this is about reputation and part is about reality; if MeeGo > ends up breaking the ABIs all the time, or perceived as breaking ABIs > this lightly, why bother with MeeGo at all ???? > > so yes give me a break. This is why I was wondering why we're not using hardfp *now* for 1.1.0. We shouldn't be breaking binary compatibility. We shouldn't be softp either. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
