Re: [AD] Indexed datafiles

[Elias Pschernig <elias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 11:03 +0100, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 07:37, Peter Wang wrote:
> > I wonder if something like this should go into 4.2.1 instead of 4.3.0?
> 
> I don't think so. Doesn't adding symbols to the DLL in Windows break ABI 
> backward compatibility?
> Of course, if we *really* want to add this (I'm not saying we don't), we 
> *can* make it a static inline function. That way, 4.2.0 programmes can 
> still use the 4.2.1 DLL (and vice versa, but we don't care).

Hm. I remember hearing about this, but forgot the details.. so can you
clarify a bit more? Isn't there a way to have symbolic lookups with
DLLs? Otherwise, we cannot add any new functions to 4.2.1, but we can
somehow work around that with "static inline"?

> > It would also be nice for the documentation to mention the version(s)
> > of Allegro in which the function were introduced.
> 
> Yes, that would be a good idea, especially now that the API is changing. 
> Helps to keep track of what has been done too. It shouldn't be too hard to 
> piece this together from the changelogs, though we may want to restrict 
> ourselves to changes since 4.0.0...
> 

Do we want anything special for it, like a @version command for _tx? Or
simply add notes at the end of functions which are not in 4.0.0, and
tell in which stable version they appeared first.

-- 
Elias Pschernig