Thanks. Is there a timeline or roadmap for starting to plan Public API v2.0 (which, if my recollection is correct, will allow us to make breaking changes)?
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:17 AM <jing...@apple.com> wrote: > > > 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
