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

[Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev]

So, while a good start, do we believe we can realistically achieve
95+% C APi test coverage or whatever and keep it there?

(That seems necessary if we made James's 100% strict rule a 100% strict rule)

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:50 PM, deadal nix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2015-08-17 12:46 GMT-07:00 Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:31 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'd propose that the only 100% strict rule should be that if the ABI/API
>> > changes, it is done in a way that *loudly* breaks old programs -- e.g.
>> > they
>> > fail to compile, link, or run (depending on how the other-lang wrappers
>> > are
>> > accessing the API functions) -- not that you get some random weird
>> > misbehavior because a function's argument types or return type has been
>> > changed.
>>
>>
>> This would require a level of testing that we don't have, just to make
>> sure that happens, no?
>>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D10725