Hi,
ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Monday, 25 de October de 2010 17:35:48 Arjan van de Ven wrote:
this is me, one of the MeeGo architects, opposing breaking the MeeGo API
this lightly.
softfp->hardfp is ABI, not API break, re-compile is enough for
almost[1] all software.
For code using only functions with integer arguments, there's no ABI
difference. It's ABI break only if you're using functions taking
floating point arguments across library borders.
MeeGo's value proposition is about giving a consistent platform to ISVs;
and this proposal completely destroys that
in image, if not reality.
In part this is about reputation and part is about reality; if MeeGo
ends up breaking the ABIs all the time, or perceived as breaking ABIs
this lightly, why bother with MeeGo at all ????
>>
so yes give me a break.
This is why I was wondering why we're not using hardfp *now* for 1.1.0.
[1] Firefox doesn't support hard-fp fully yet, I don't know
about WebKit.
There are patches in Mozilla bugzilla for adding hardfp support
into XPCOM (small change), but making JIT hardfp compatible
is more work. I.e. for now JIT needs to be disabled with hardfp.
Note: On N900 using JIT would be bad decision anyway because it
increases browser memory usage significantly i.e. makes it noticeably
slower because of increased swapping.
We shouldn't be breaking binary compatibility.
We shouldn't be softp either.
Agree.
- Eero
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
