>> We could ship a C compatibility header as Andy suggested, but I'm not >> sure it's 100% needed. > > Is your view on this a strong one? I feel fairly sure that we ought > to continue to distribute this code - but in a deprecated and > undocumented separate library - because I think by doing so we can > help users with negligible ongoing maintenance cost.
But if it's not documented, how are people going to know that they should link against `libgh'? :-) This solution would be OK for me, but I find this "in-between" libgh trick more complex than either removing the gh code or leaving it entirely. Thanks, Ludo'.
