On 25 February 2016 at 09:26, Colomban Wendling <[email protected]> wrote:
> An API break is questionable, but a "nice to have" change like this PR is > not worth an ABI break. > > How would this break ABI? It's a typedef rename, not a type change. The > "nice to have" part is including TM_PARSER_* enum values. > One option was to move it into a GEANY_PRIVATE struct, that would change the struct and so break the ABI. > […] Which one do you prefer? > > Hum… I prefer the new type name. I prefer full compatibility. I prefer > stuff to be defined where it makes sense. > > So, I guess what I'd prefer is > > - use the new type name > - introduce a deprecated alias of the old name > - install *tm_parser.h* (possibly guarding everything but the typedef > in GEANY_PRIVATE) > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/906#issuecomment-188513167>. > --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/906#issuecomment-188552606
