As I said, I'm convinced, I'm fine with removing the old code
Barry > On Dec 7, 2018, at 2:47 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Smith, Barry F." <[email protected]> writes: > >>> On Dec 7, 2018, at 2:25 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> "Smith, Barry F." <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>>> On Dec 7, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Smith, Barry F." <[email protected]> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> A potential drawback is some users also use HDF5 directly in their code >>>>>> and may be using an older version (people are very slow to change). >>>>> >>>>> The HDF5 developers were very deliberate about this. You can still use >>>>> the old API in your own code while linking to the new library. See >>>>> H5_USE_16_API. >>>>> >>>>> https://support.hdfgroup.org/HDF5/doc/RM/APICompatMacros.html >>>> >>>> This pages is a firehose. Most people who have HDF5 in their code (that >>>> someone else probably wrote) will never get through this page to know what >>>> to do. >> >>> >>> You literally just compile that old code using -DH5_USE_16_API while using >>> new HDF5 libraries and headers. >> >> Where do you put this -DH5_USE_16_API thing? I literally don't have a clue >> how my build system works. I would rather just stick to the old version >> since its worked for the last n years. (This is the average user/developer >> of package/application A) > > I get your point, but instructions are simple and we can't stay in the > dark ages forever. I think the HDF5 folks did a good job with their API > deprecations. We'd be upset if people were going through pains to > support petsc-2.2. > > ./configure CPPFLAGS=-DH5_USE_16_API
