[rrd-developers] it exposes too much ...

Florian Forster rrdtool at nospam.verplant.org
Tue Jun 10 14:18:21 CEST 2008

Hi again,

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 01:20:44PM +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> ..., and export-documenting the bits that some people may be using.

so, if I understand you correctly, there will be functions in 1.3 that
are exported but not documented and that will be removed in 1.4. Right?

How is the situation of the people who need these functions improved by
not documenting them? If the functions are removed in 1.4 they will need
to adapt - whether the functions are declared ``officially'' or not.

How is librrd's situation improved by not declaring those functions
externally? Are you limited in your plans for 1.4 in any way?

I guess you're concerned about publishing functions that will be removed
in the foreseeable future. But not publishing doesn't change the fact
that some people (might) use them. If you rather export the functions
than not, why not declare them using __attribute__((deprecated))? This
way you can show people explicitly that they shouldn't use those
functions (instead of showing them implicitly by hiding the functions).

In the best case people don't care about exported but undocumented
functions. In all other cases exported but undocumented functions are
worse than exported and documented functions.

Again, just my $.02 - I just didn't have the impression I got my point

Florian octo Forster
Hacker in training
GnuPG: 0x91523C3D
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/rrd-developers/attachments/20080610/765d804a/attachment.bin 

More information about the rrd-developers mailing list