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

[deadal nix via llvm-dev]

2015-08-16 21:51 GMT-07:00 Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>:

>
>
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 9:49 PM deadal nix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2015-08-16 21:47 GMT-07:00 Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 6:45 PM deadal nix via llvm-dev <
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chiming in with http://reviews.llvm.org/D10725
>>>>
>>>> Being able to read and generate IR is at least some very basic thing we
>>>> can agree on is needed. Can we get some testing for it ? Personally I don't
>>>> really mind if this is going to be stable or not, but at least, having some
>>>> test coverage would allow to take whatever path that is going to be taken
>>>> willingly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Right, and that's the problem. Expanding the C API to cover reading and
>>> generating IR in a stable way will lock the C++ API down in a way that I'm
>>> not comfortable with - I think it has already gone too far.
>>>
>>> -eric
>>>
>>
>> That seems like a bare minimum.
>>
>> The C++ evolve from one version to another, what is preventing the C API
>> to do the same ?
>>
>>
> The promise of stability. We don't promise that the C++ API will stay
> stable.
>
> -eric
>


Why was that promise be made in the first place ? Has it been made in the
first place ?

Also, whether, the C API is stable or change between version, being able to
read and write IR from it seems like a bare minimum and having test for
this as well.

Having a test does not prevent the API to be changed. It just ensure that
it is changed willingly as one would have to update the test in addition of
the API.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150816/24f3fd15/attachment.html>