[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: [patch] request for review - apidox for kdelibs/kdeui (long)
From:       Nicolas Goutte <nicolasg () snafu ! de>
Date:       2003-09-07 16:51:02
[Download RAW message or body]

I am sorry to have not been precise enough. I am also sorry to have written 
compatibility again with a c too much (the symbol is KDE_NO_COMPAT.)

I am going to answer your second question first.

Defining KDE_NO_COMPAT is a "tool" for compatibility between major KDE 
versions. So let take for example the near future: KDE 4. In KDE 4, there 
will be functions that will be considered deprec(i)ated and these will be 
conditional with KDE_NO_COMPAT so that KDE 4 application do not use these 
functions. Of course, a KDE 3 porgram will probably still need these 
functions and therefore will need to define KDE_NO_COMPAT.

KDE_NO_COMPAT is not meant to exclude functions between say KDE 3.1 and KDE 
3.2. The reason is that an application that is not part of the basic modules 
of KDE (for examples: KOffice, KDE ExtraGear...) will not define 
KDE_NO_COMPAT, as they are adapted to run on KDE 3. (Defining KDE_NO_COMPACT 
would mean that they need compatibility functions from KDE 2.)

KDE_NO_COMPAT comes from a similar symbol in Qt: QT_NO_COMPAT, which is also 
used for compatibility between major Qt versions.

As for your first question, the answer is there should be not any new 
KDE_NO_COMPAT conditioned functions before KDE 4. (And as soon as KDE 4.0 is 
out, the next ones will not be until KDE 5.)

I hope that I explained it a little better.

Have a nice day!

On Sunday 07 September 2003 13:48, Brad Hards wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:17 pm, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > I do not think that adding #if KDE_NO_COMPACT is allowed.
> >
> > KDE_NO_COMPACT is only for major version KDE 2, KDE 3, future KDE 4.
> > Inside a major version (KDE 3.0, 3.1, 3.2..), it should *not* be added.
> > (Someone has already broken KOffice this way, so please do not start that
> > again!)
>
> I'm not following you.
> 1. Are you saying that there should not be any dependencies on
> KDE_NO_COMPAT at all? Or are you saying that could can be excluded (#ifndef
> KDE_NO_COMPAT), but not included (#ifdef KDE_NO_COMPAT)?
> 2. What is the purpose of KDE_NO_COMPAT? When it is used, what does that
> mean?
>
> Brad
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQE/WxsLW6pHgIdAuOMRAthqAJ9ZB88mxmMyA0clEGdfdLIoEoW9EACgnJHF
> AkuAxGQT5S5+DYx1y+AN5fE=
> =yFbu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to
> >> unsubscribe <<

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]