> On Feb 26, 2015, at 10:08 AM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > > First, do we require a minimum version of SWIG? I think the answer to this > is currently no. My next question is whether we can require 3.0? It was > released close to a year ago, so it should be fairly stable. SWIG 3.0 > contains some bugfixes that are useful for generating correct wrappers on > Windows, especially with typedefs. > > My second question is about our interface guarantees. Are we guaranteeing > interface compatibility at the C++ level, or only at the wrapped level? i.e. > is it ok to change the signature of a C++ method as long as SWIG can > ultimately generate a wrapper that behaves identically?
At the C++ level. We have clients (e.g. Xcode) that use the C++ API's directly. Jim > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
