On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Topi Mäenpää <[email protected]> wrote: > Or rather could, if the interface wasn't a moving target.
If an interface is a moving target, that means that trying to promise compatibility for it is generally a bad idea. Once something is made public, you're stuck with it. For a very long time, and maybe even forever if people get too attached to it. You can't go back on that, so you need to be very, very sure you'll be happy with it. As evidenced by the v8 to v4vm change, we aren't there yet. And once we do expose it, we tie our hands from making future changes that might be in our benefit. I understand your pain. The company I work for has also had software impacted by these changes (we did the QtScript to v8 port over the summer, we're currently on 5.1, but soon we'll have to look at what changes we need to make to move to 5.2). But erring on the side of caution means we can more reliably end up with something that we're free to keep improving in a backwards compatible way to the majority of folks, while making the life of the few inconvenient. BR, Robin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
