Hi, On 15 October 2015 at 09:18, Erik De Rijcke <derijcke.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Auke Booij <a...@tulcod.com> wrote: >> New values may be added (but not >> changed or removed) to protocol specifications without introducing any >> compatibility issues. > > This is not clear for me. Compatibility issues for the current C bindings or > for all language bindings? If it's for all language bindings than this might > introduce a whole explosion of derived implicit specifications for each > language. Eg. the enum order in Java. Better would be to specify a goal "no > compatibility issues" and a set of form specifications eg. "the order of an > enum shall not be changed".
Yes, agreed. That's the only tractable way: the definition of a closed enum requires strictly linear append-only additions. Next topic. :) Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
