Hi,

as Patrick revealed to me yesterday, the SyncEvolution project is not planning 
currently to commit to a stable API/ABI policy. Patrick pointed out that this 
is particularly difficult to do right in C++. This is perfectly ok for now, 
but might become more important in the future of SyncEvolution, when adoption 
in other projects increases (such as KDE PIM at the moment). 

I'd like to point you guys to a document the KDE project set up a long time 
ago which shows typical issues and provides some solutions [1]. Especially the 
d-pointer (or opaque pointer) pattern should be applied to all classes that 
are part of the public API [2].

Footnotes:
 [1] http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Binary_Compatibility_Issues_With_C++ 
 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_pointer
-- 
Kind regards,
Sascha Peilicke
http://saschpe.wordpress.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to