2011/12/11 Tal Hadad <tal...@hotmail.com> > > Yes it does. What C programmers often do is adding unused vfuncs as > padding for future extension of the class. From this perspective Vala could > theoretically add some kind of padding to avoid abi breakage. > So what about this idea for fix it: > Create a new attribute property in [CCode], named binary_position, that is > used for virtual methods, but can be used for another things(such as > fields, etc.). > It can be used by the developer to avoid this risk, by doing so: > Every time the developer create a new virtual method, he shell pick the > smallest number available for virtual method position, and put it in > binary_position in [CCode]. > On every planned ABI(&API) break, he can minimize those binary_position(s) > for virtual methods. > > This idea is based on the assumption that the size of XClass struct > doesn't matter and can be changed(Am I right?). > Also, how does the virtual method order is currently done by Vala? Is it > alphabetic or by the order of the decelerations? >
The ordering does not matter, the padding does. -- www.debian.org - The Universal Operating System
_______________________________________________ vala-list mailing list vala-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
