[PATCH] D12685: Document the stability policy for LLVM-C APIs.

[Mehdi Amini via llvm-commits]

What I had in mind was trying to answer when I said that I haven’t seen data:

- Who are the primary users of the C API? 
- What are their use case? Which should translate to “What part of the API is of interest”? (the linker does not care about the IRBuilder for instance).
- What do they expect from a C API: is stability really important or would pure bindings be OK?
- etc.

It may be that a large amount of project are using C because you can’t interface with C++ conveniently. Since we don’t promise full compatibility these projects would have to either revlock to LLVM or write some compatibility layer anyway, so having some way to auto-generate C-bindings over the C++ API can cover these use cases. 
In this scenario, the non-bindings “stable” C API would have very little surface in comparison.

— 
Mehdi

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 6:14 PM, Amaury SECHET <deadalnix+llvmreview at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> deadalnix added a comment.
> 
> I'm not sure what data you'd like to see. I'm talking from experience using the C API from a foreign language, and it seems that @jyknight has the same experience.
> 
> 
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12685
> 
> 
>