On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 08:15:13PM +0200, Carlos R. Mafra wrote: > On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 at 14:08:18 -0400, Brad Jorsch wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 07:49:12PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > > > > > I think this removal of WC_Matrix might break binary compatibility, > > > i.e. binaries built against the older header will fail to run > > > correctly, since 13 is suddenly WC_TabView instead of WC_SplitView. (I > > > am assuming that enum is working as a #define would. But that is me > > > guessing.) > > > > You guess correctly, at least in C. > > If one recompilation is the price to pay to remove unused crud from > WINGs, it's worth it IMHO.
There is no particular need for the numbering in the enum to change, though. Just because we remove WC_Matrix doesn't mean WC_SplitView can't remain 13 instead of moving it to 12. -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
