On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:48:41AM +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> 
> On 20 Jan 2009 at 9:23, Konrad Rzeszutek wrote:
> 
> > I would recommend that you provide as the first variable in all of the 
> > structs
> > an unsigned int called 'version'. This way if the structs are extended they
> > would be backwards compatible and there is an easy way to identify which
> > version of structs they are.
> 
> Hi!
> 
> When doing an initial version, why not try to do it right at the beginning? 
> Addind 
> a version number to a poor design is terrible, because for compatibility 
> you'll 
> always have to support old versions then. If you do not, why the version 
> number?

Because we are humans and we make mistakes. It is one of the mechanism to fix
something later on when an Application Binary Interface (ABI) is "holy" and
cannot be changed.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to