[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cdt-dev] Speaking of API compatibility
- From: Doug Schaefer <cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 09:54:21 -0500
- Authentication-results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of firstname.lastname@example.org designates 10.236.182.36 as permitted sender) email@example.com; dkim=pass firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=3KahTA1vnUNSRfWYI/yRvOF2OTTeYwLgBas24HyUbqI=; b=n5ewB8IrAb4YhlQIonGCeuA4FeETDukoFQWNOasGLMF/tMSalPW67aGK5xfHyPrQPk fw+7IeacnRj63gjXueWmRtntJqewK9utrvMjNH+C8NBHvLiU48oFpcvXMGTrsGZ6QrTH 4dVSqAUQq+A4l7ymEfuVEVBvxYjstcgTpon8w=
I'm not sure if there are any issues with that. Assuming we are API
compliant, you weren't allowed to add new Java 6 types to the
interfaces. And Java 6 is backwards compatibile with Java 5. In fact
almost everyone had been using Java 6 already anyway.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since we're on the topic of being backwards-compatible.
> I don't have much experience on how vendors extend the CDT,
> so it is not clear to me if our move from Java 5 to Java 6 is
> backwards-compatible for them?
> cdt-dev mailing list