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

[Eric Christopher via llvm-commits]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:05 AM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:

> 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.
>
>
Hopefully s/in comparison// :)

-eric


> —
> 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20150916/ac2fbe22/attachment.html>