astippich added a comment.
In D16163#342057 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16163#342057>, @mgallien wrote: > In D16163#342046 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16163#342046>, @astippich wrote: > > > To be on the safe side here: I am allowed to modify private member functions regarding binary compatibility, right? > > > This page is a very good reference: https://community.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C%2B%2B Thanks, I already knew that side, but I tend to ask explicitly in case I misunderstood something. I really don't want to mess up frameworks :) In D16163#342061 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16163#342061>, @bruns wrote: > In D16163#342046 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16163#342046>, @astippich wrote: > > > To be on the safe side here: I am allowed to modify private member functions regarding binary compatibility, right? > > > Non-virtual methods do not affect the class layout or the vtable layout, so you are safe here for sure. `private` or not does not matter. Thanks for the explanation! REPOSITORY R286 KFileMetaData REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D16163 To: astippich, bruns Cc: mgallien, kde-frameworks-devel, #baloo, ashaposhnikov, michaelh, astippich, spoorun, ngraham, bruns, abrahams
