Hi Simon,
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:17:15PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > Sylvain Rochet wrote: > >Humm, I would have thought that a revision release didn't change the API > >at all, > > Thinking about it again, I guess it was an ABI change, not an API change. > For the target of lwIP (at that time?) keeping the API stable was enough. Well, that was the question :-), whether we should go to API or ABI stable, from my point of view, keeping the API stable is well enough. > And remember the API does *not* include struct layout (not event struct > members, since users should access the structs via defines, not the > members). Indeed. > I don't think that changes with 2.0.0 unless there are strong request > to keep the ABI stable. I'm not willing too, either. Keeping the API stable only require contrib examples to build and work without change, keeping the ABI stable require a check that exported symbols didn't change at all. Sylvain
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
