On Friday, August 30, 2019 10:45 AM, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:49:37 +0000 > Simon Ser [email protected] wrote: > > > On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 2:43 PM, Victor Berger [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > 20 août 2019 13:30 "Simon Ser" [email protected] a écrit: > > > > > > > So now the question is: some scanners may have generated some code from > > > > presentation-time.xml. Some scanners may generate different code for > > > > bitfields, maybe breaking ABI. Is it fine to add the bitfield > > > > attribute? > > > > For instance, wayland-rs seems to be generating different code: > > > > https://github.com/Smithay/wayland-rs/blob/master/wayland-scanner/src/common_gen.rs#L33 > > > > Adding Victor Berger to the discussion. > > > > > > I can't talk for other projects, but in the case of wayland-rs this > > > kind of corrections to the protocol files is very much welcome. Our > > > scanner makes use of these annotation to generate appropriate APIs, > > > and in this specific case the absence of the annotation makes it > > > generate wrong code. So from wayland-rs point of view this is a > > > bugfix, and thus not in contraction with stability. Especially > > > given wayland-rs has not yet reached stability and is still likely > > > to change, I'll just bump the version number when updating > > > wayland-protocols. > > > > Thanks for your feedback! I'll wait for thoughts from Pekka before > > doing anything, but I'd like to get these fixed too. > > Hi, > > I don't recall hearing much from people with custom code generating > scanners, so until we upset someone and they come to us complaining > about regressions the first time, I am fine with adding these > annotations that do not break the ABI generated by wayland-scanner. > > When we started introducing these new attributes that may "break" the > consumers of code generated by custom scanners, we had a discussion > about this very issue. If I remember right, everyone involved at the > time were happy with the "break" since the benefits will be greater > than the damage in the long run. IIRC Victor was there then, and he > said the same now. Makes sense. Reviewed-by: Simon Ser <[email protected]> > From my behalf: > > Acked-by: Pekka Paalanen [email protected] > > Do you need me to land this? (I believe so.) > Since wayland-protocols is still using email workflow, please give all > your Reviewed-by and Acked-by tags explicitly. _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
