> On Sep 29, 2017, at 6:21 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> It's time for MagicKit 6 to come out, and we're going to add a new SpellKind:
>
> @available(MagicKit 6)
> case summoning
> // [charm, curse, hex, blight, jinx, summoning]
>
> We ship out a beta to our biggest clients, but realize we forgot a vital
> feature. Beta 2 comes with another new SpellKind:
>
> @available(MagicKit 6)
> case banishing
> // [charm, curse, hex, blight, jinx, banishing, summoning]
>
> And now we're in trouble: anything built against the first beta expects
> 'summoning' to have tag 5, not 6. Our clients have to recompile everything
> before they can even try out the new version of the library.
Just to check: How much do we need to care about this? It's a beta, after
all—clients should expect stuff to break and should rebuild against the new
versions as they come out.
If the answer is that this is unacceptable, I think we can come up with a
"private revision" syntax for this:
@available(MagicKit 6r2)
case banishing
The "r2" might not even show up in the generated header, but the case ordering
would take it into account, giving it a lower weight than even the most minor
part of the version number.
--
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies
_______________________________________________
swift-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
