[llvm-dev] [LLVMdev] [RFC] Developer Policy for LLVM C API

[James Y Knight via llvm-dev]

BTW for those following along, I wrote up a concrete proposal saying
basically that, at http://reviews.llvm.org/D12685, if anyone else was
interested in providing their input.

So far it's garnered a -1 from Eric.

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 7:34 PM, James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote:

> On Aug 18, 2015, at 10:41 PM, deadal nix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Let's not get this die. The C API is too valuable to let this die.
> >
> > I propose the following plan:
> >  - Add tests for the current API. This will allow to make sure that
> everything works and would ensure that changes are made intentionally, nto
> accidentally.
> >  - For area that do not exist in the C API right now, and for which
> support seems needed, we establish a plan to support it according to
> current functionality and planned evolution.
> >  - It is understood that the C API require more stability than the C++
> one as it is often used accross language boundary where type checking
> cannot be done. On the other hand, no promise of stability is made so LLVM
> can still evolve at "ludicrous speed". If a change to LLVM cannot be mapped
> to the current API, the API is updated.
>
> +1 from me, with the additional "no changing existing functions'
> signatures, replace with new function if necessary" rule.
>
> Perhaps you can make a patch to the DeveloperPolicy document actually
> writing down your view on the Developer Policy for the C API? Then we never
> have to debate it again, because it'll be written down for future
> reference. And, reviewing that patch will give people one last opportunity
> to object and/or bikeshed. :)
>
> James
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150915/eb62b89d/attachment.html>