Pascal Giard <evily...@gmail.com>: > Could you elaborate on the modifications you have in mind that could > constitute a modification please? > Based on your judgement, do you think an application using libsox2 > could reasonably depend on the previous behavior?
That would mean a change that is not backward compatible? Probably not. But in the other direction, a client might want/need to ensure that the library it uses can read 64-bit WAVs, or doesn't crash when resampling very long audio streams, etc. Actually, upon thinking about it again, it appears that this symbol-specific version behaves like the second part of SHLIB_VERSION and should be increased whenever there are any changes in functionality at all. The question is just, in our case where there are lots of format handlers and effects that are accessed via a few common functions: Won't it be necessary to always increase more or less every symbol's version at the same time? If so, the finer granularity is only theoretical. Ulrich ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan _______________________________________________ SoX-devel mailing list SoX-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-devel
