Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2010
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 11:29:13AM -0600, karl williamson wrote:
> > karl williamson wrote:
> > >Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > >>On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, karl williamson wrote:
>
> > >>Right now, this is the only thing that will work. Functions intended
> > >>to be "inline" have to be in the same compilation unit. Making a
> > >>private header, such as foo_inline.h, is one way to do that.
>
> That approach appeals to me. It avoids polluting external namespaces with
> (even) more functions.
It's the maximally portable/safe approach, and completely avoids dealing
with external linkage (and all the conditional complexities that entails
(think AIX under all its various compiler options, for example)).
> > >I made it an external function in 5.12.0 only because of the need for it
> > >in re_comp.c. The API was deliberately not exposed. It's true that
> > >someone could have started to use it, but I believe that we don't need
> > >to preserve an undocumented interface. Yes? No?
> >
> > I have since discovered that we specifically say in perlapi.pod that no
> > interface not documented there can be relied on. So I claim we don't
> > have to preserve regcurly as an external function.
>
> Yes. If it's not public, it's free to be changed.
Fair enough. I hadn't had time to investigate at all; I had only gotten
to the point where I realized I had to investigate.
> In practice, even prior to Jesse's new strict maint lockdown approach,
> for 5.8.x I didn't change the prototypes of any external function,
> public or not, because I didn't trust someone out there not to have
> managed somehow to expose the function named mangled with the arguments
> in some way that dynamic linking would fail (at run time, probably even
> lazily) if the arguments changed, *and* that they'd then blame *me* for
> their problem.
For what it's worth, that was generally my bias too. Of course that may
only have helped feed the expectations that have since made everyone else
take such a conservative stance.
Realistically, I doubt I'll have time this week to look at anything
related to this.
--
Andy Dougherty doughera@lafayette.edu
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next