3 ms·
> warn users with a deprecation warning in one version and then they make the backwards incompatible change in the next version That's exactly how _not_ to bre
by etatoby 10y ago
> warn users with a deprecation warning in one version and then they make the backwards incompatible change in the next version
That's exactly how _not_ to break backwards compatibility.
- stefantalpalaru 10y ago> That's exactly how _not_ to break backwards compatibility. No, no, no. Backwards compatibility means that there are no breaking changes at all - announced by deprecation warnings or not. Think Linux's public API.
- zmb_ 10y agoThat is, by definition, breaking backwards compatibility. I.e., the code that I wrote against version X will not run against version X + n. They just give a warning about it in version X + (n - 1). Backwards compatibility means that my code will run against X + n for all values of n >= 0 without modifications.
- Sean1708 10y agoHow should you break backwards compatibility then? This is about as good a solution I can come up with.